Opinion ID: 1163894
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: was there sufficient evidence to support a conviction for first degree murder?

Text: The defendant contends that there is no showing that the stab wounds did, in fact, cause the death of the deceased. The pathologist testified: Q And would you tell the Court what that examination consisted of? A I conducted a complete internal and external examination of the body. Q And what did your external examination reveal? A The body was that of an elderly man that was 69 inches in length and weighed 128 pounds. There were a number of wounds on the external surface of the body. The first one that I described is on the base of the neck, consisted of a stab wound two inches in length and superimposed on it was a superficial laceration six inches in length extending from the base of the neck around to the lateral side. Then the front of the chest, there were three closely grouped stab wounds, each about one-half inch in length, and these were located from 53 to 54 inches above the heel and from one to two inches left of the midline. There was a small laceration at the base of the left little finger and there were six stab wounds in the back of the right chest, one of them in the midline and the others ranging up to as much as four inches to the right of the midline, and all of them 54 to 58 inches above the heel. There was a small scratch over the right collarbone and a superficial abrasion of the right knee. Q Would you tell the Court what your internal examination then revealed? A In examining the chest, it developed that there were two penetrating stab wounds of the right lung, these entering the back, and these were the only two of the six stab wounds in the back that did enter the chest. In the front there were three closely grouped stab wounds of the heart on the front surface that extended into the left ventricle of the heart and as a result of these wounds of both the heart and the lung there was extensive bleeding around the heart and pericardium and in the right thoracic space. The remainder of the examination disclosed also a far-advanced cancer of the left lung, which was not involved in any of the stab wounds. Q Anything else that was revealed of significance? A No, sir, nothing else of significance.       Q Was there any way, Doctor, of determining which of the stab wounds were inflicted first? A No. Q Would there have been a considerable amount of bleeding caused by the stab wounds? A Yes, sir. Q Both front and back? A The wound that would have bled most is the two-inch laceration at the base of the neck. The other wounds would have bled to a lesser extent but probably significantly. The pathologist did not testify directly that the stab wounds caused the death. Circumstances surrounding a death may be sufficient to support a finding of the cause of a death without expert opinion as to the cause: The fact that the victim died from the combined effects of a pre-existing disease or condition and a blow or wound maliciously inflicted by the defendant does not relieve the defendant of liability. (footnote omitted) When a person inflicts a blow or wound upon another [i]t is well settled that the consequences of an act which is the efficient cause of the death of another are not excused, nor is the criminal responsibility for causing death lessened, by the pre-existing physical condition of the person killed, at the time the act was done, or by his low vitality, which rendered him unable to withstand the shock of the wound inflicted, and without which pre-existing condition the blow would not have been fatal, if a causal connection between the blow and the fact of death is made to appear. Accordingly, the fact that the victim died from the combined effects of the wound maliciously inflicted by the defendant and a disease not connected with the wound does not relieve the defendant of liability. (footnote omitted) Expert testimony is not necessarily essential to support a conviction of homicide. Thus, where it is apparent that ordinary laymen could perceive, from such factors as the nature of the wound or the circumstances surrounding an attack, that a defendant's acts caused the death, medical testimony as to cause of death is not essential. (footnote omitted) A contrary result is reached, however, where from the nature of the agency alleged to have caused the death, the causal connection is not within the average layman's perception. In such circumstances, expert testimony is essential to support a conviction. (footnote omitted) Armstrong v. State (Alaska), 502 P.2d 440, 445-446 (1972). Despite the advanced state of the cancer of the lung, we have no difficulty in finding that the testimony presented was sufficient from which the trial court could find that the stab wounds were, in fact, the cause of the death. The evidence was sufficient to link the defendant to said stab wounds and support a conviction for first degree murder. State v. Drury, 110 Ariz. 447, 520 P.2d 495 (1974). The matter is remanded to the trial court for a hearing to determine if the defendant did, in fact, waive the right to a jury trial. The court shall make findings of fact and certify to this court said findings together with the reporter's transcript of any hearing held thereon within thirty days of the date of the issuance of the mandate in this case. HAYS, C.J., and STRUCKMEYER, LOCKWOOD and HOLOHAN, JJ., concur. On Motion Granted Ordered: Motion to Set Aside Conviction  Granted. Further ordered: Remanding this cause for a new trial.