State v. DeLeon, SCWC–11–0000064.
Decision Date | 15 January 2014 |
Docket Number | No. SCWC–11–0000064.,SCWC–11–0000064. |
Citation | 319 P.3d 382,131 Hawai'i 463 |
Court | Hawaii Supreme Court |
Parties | STATE of Hawai‘i, Respondent/Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Phillip DeLEON, Petitioner/Defendant–Appellant. |
Phyllis J. Hironaka for petitioner.
Sonja P. McCullen, for respondent.
Phillip DeLeon was convicted of Murder in the Second Degree, two counts of Carrying or Use of a Firearm in the Commission of a Separate Felony, and several other charges,1 in relation to the July 31, 2009 fatal shooting of Shawn Powell. The State alleged, inter alia, that DeLeon shot Powell and shot at Powell's friend, Justin Gamboa, following an altercation at a nightclub. On appeal, the Intermediate Court of Appeals reversed the Circuit Court of the First Circuit's2 judgment as to DeLeon's conviction for one count of Carrying or Use of a Firearm in the Commission of a Felony, but affirmed DeLeon's remaining convictions.
DeLeon raises two issues in his application for writ of certiorari. First, DeLeon argues that his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by committing errors that resulted in the circuit court precluding expert testimony regarding the presence of cocaine in Powell's blood at the time of the shooting. Second, DeLeon argues that the circuit court's jury instruction, modeled after the then-current Hawai‘i Pattern Jury Instructions–Criminal (HAWJIC) 7.01 with regard to self-defense "failed to completely and properly instruct the jury on the law of self-defense."
We conclude that DeLeon has failed to establish that his trial counsel was ineffective with regard to the admissibility of expert testimony on cocaine use. However, we further conclude that the circuit court plainly erred in excluding such testimony. The defense expert was prepared to testify that, to a reasonable degree of scientific probability, Powell was under the influence of cocaine at the time of the shooting. However, the circuit court erroneously required that the testimony be offered to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, and accordingly excluded the testimony. This error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and thus we vacate DeLeon's convictions for second-degree murder (Count II) and Carrying or Use of a Firearm While Engaged in the Commission of a Separate Felony (Count IV), and remand for a new trial.
With regard to the jury instruction on self-defense, we conclude that the circuit court's instruction accurately stated the law and thus was not erroneous.
Accordingly, we vacate in part and affirm in part the ICA's judgment, and vacate the circuit court's judgment of conviction and sentence on Counts II and IV, and remand to the circuit court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
I. Background
The following factual background is taken from the record on appeal.
On August 5, 2009, DeLeon was indicted for: Attempted Murder in the First Degree as to Powell and Gamboa (Count I); Murder in the Second Degree as to Powell, in violation of HRS §§ 707–701.5 and 706–656 (Count II)3 ; Attempted Murder in the Second Degree as to Gamboa, in violation of HRS §§ 705–500, 707–701.5, and 706–656 (Count III); Carrying or Use of Firearm in the Commission of a Separate Felony in violation of HRS § 134–21 as to Count II (Count IV); Carrying or Use of Firearm in the Commission of a Separate Felony in violation of HRS § 134–21 as to Count III (Count V); Place to Keep Pistol or Revolver in violation of HRS § 134–25 (Count VI); Reckless Endangering in the First Degree in violation of HRS § 707–713 (Count VII); and Ownership or Possession Prohibited of Any Firearm or Ammunition by a Person Convicted of Certain Crimes in violation of HRS §§ 134–7(b) and (h) (Count VIII).
Prior to trial, on August 24, 2010, the State filed a motion in limine, seeking, inter alia, to exclude any evidence that Powell's blood tested positive for .05 mg/L of cocaine on grounds that such evidence is inadmissible under Hawai‘i Rules of Evidence (HRE) Rule 404(b)4 and/or irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial under HRE Rule 403.5
DeLeon opposed the State's motion, arguing, inter alia, that evidence that Powell's blood tested positive for .05 mg/L of cocaine was "essential and probative to [DeLeon's] self-defense assertion, and its exclusion would be extremely prejudicial to his claims[.]" Among the exhibits attached to DeLeon's opposition was a letter from Dr. Clifford G. Wong, the Toxicology Laboratory Director for Clinical Laboratories of Hawaii. The letter indicated that DeLeon's defense counsel retained Dr. Wong as an expert in "DUI toxicology" and largely discussed Powell's blood alcohol concentration. With regard to Powell's cocaine concentration at the time of the shooting, Dr. Wong stated, in relevant part:
The retrograde extrapolation of [ ] Powell's blood cocaine concentration to the time of the shooting was performed to yield a probable range of 0.06 to 0.08 mg/L. The time of cocaine ingestion is unknown, so the actual cocaine dosage cannot be determined. Information regarding total amount ingested and the time of ingestion would be required to determine more accurately whether [ ] Powell has [sic] under the influence of cocaine at the time of the shooting.
(Emphasis added).
At a hearing on the motion, the circuit court noted that "[t]he issue right away that the Court [saw]" was Dr. Wong's statement that he would need more information. Defense counsel responded:
The DPA then argued for an HRE Rule 104 hearing:
[I]t's the state's understanding that cocaine does not have a consistent effect on people like alcohol does. I think that this euphoric state can also be a dysphoric state and I think that the witness would testify to that, that he cannot describe the states that people go through on a consistent basis, ... even knowing or being able to retro-extrapolate the amount of cocaine that was in the blood at the time of the specific incident.
The circuit court ruled that it would conduct an HRE Rule 104 hearing before allowing any testimony regarding Powell's cocaine level. The circuit court also informed defense counsel of its concerns:
Shortly before opening statements, the circuit court ruled, over the State's objection, that defense counsel could mention in his opening statement DeLeon's perception that Powell may have been "high on something without making any specifications." The circuit court stated that the substance or the amount could not be mentioned "until we have had subsequent [HRE] Rule 104 hearings."
At trial, Jermaine Beaudoin testified that on the night of July 30, 2009, he, along with Gamboa, and Powell went in Gamboa's Lincoln Navigator to Bar Seven7 next to Ala Moana Center at about 2:15 to 2:30 a.m. Beaudoin estimated that at this point in the evening, he had consumed between nine to eleven alcoholic drinks, and that Powell had also been drinking but was not drunk. At some point, Beaudoin saw Powell talking to DeLeon, whom Beaudoin...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Known
...withdrawal or substantial impairment of a potentially meritorious defense. Id. at 348-49, 615 P.2d at 104 ; State v. DeLeon, 131 Hawai‘i 463, 478-79, 319 P.3d 382, 397-98 (2014). The second prong of this test is satisfied if the defendant shows a possible impairment of a potentially meritor......
-
Araiza v. State
...a whole, the assistance provided was within the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases.’ " State v. DeLeon, 131 Hawai‘i 463, 479, 319 P.3d 382, 398 (2014) (quoting Dan v. State, 76 Hawai‘i 423, 427, 879 P.2d 528, 532 (1994) ).The defendant has the burden of establishing......
-
State v. David
...we hold that there is a reasonable possibility that excluding the BAC evidence affected the trial's outcome. See State v. DeLeon, 131 Hawai‘i 463, 486, 319 P.3d 382, 405 (2014) (holding that because the defendant's self-defense argument relied largely on the decedent's behavior immediately ......
-
State v. Ishimine
...State v. Getz, 131 Hawai‘i 19, 27, 313 P.3d 708, 716 (2013) (failure to issue specific unanimity instruction); State v. DeLeon, 131 Hawai‘i 463, 485, 319 P.3d 382, 404 (2014) (preclusion of doctor's testimony regarding probable effects of cocaine on decedent).The dissent cites to dicta in o......