State v. Beaudet-Close
| Decision Date | 24 June 2020 |
| Docket Number | SCWC-17-0000701 |
| Citation | 468 P.3d 80 |
| Parties | STATE of Hawai‘i, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony G. BEAUDET-CLOSE, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Hawaii Supreme Court |
Victor M. Cox, Keauhou, for petitioner
Stephen L. Frye for respondent
We held in State v. Mainaaupo, 117 Hawai‘i 235, 178 P.3d 1 (2008), that the foundational privilege against self-incrimination, commonly referred to as the "right to remain silent," attaches during post-arrest police interrogation. We later expanded the scope of this privilege to pre-arrest detainment. State v. Tsujimura, 140 Hawai‘i 299, 400 P.3d 500 (2017). This case explores if a suspect's refusal to reenact the incident for which the suspect is being interviewed invokes the right to remain silent and if the prosecution's reference to the suspect's refusal at trial violates that right.
In 2016, Petitioner/Defendant-Appellant Anthony G. Beaudet-Close (Beaudet-Close) was involved in an altercation with Luke Ault (Ault) during which Beaudet-Close allegedly punched and kicked Ault multiple times. As a result of the altercation, Ault sustained permanent and life-threatening injuries. Beaudet-Close was charged with Attempted Murder in the Second Degree and Assault in the First Degree.
At trial, the State played for the jury a video of a detective interviewing Beaudet-Close (police interview video). The police interview video concluded with Beaudet-Close declining the detective's request that Beaudet-Close reenact the altercation.
Beaudet-Close filed a motion for a mistrial after the jury viewed the police interview video, arguing that it was an impermissible comment on his invocation of his right to remain silent. The circuit court denied Beaudet-Close's motion and trial continued.
The jury convicted Beaudet-Close of Attempted Murder in the Second Degree and the circuit court sentenced Beaudet-Close to life in prison. The ICA affirmed the Judgment of Conviction and Sentence on appeal.
In his application for writ of certiorari, Beaudet-Close argues that he invoked his right to remain silent when he refused to participate in a reenactment and that the prosecutor's decision to play a video of that refusal before the jury was an improper comment on his invocation of that right.
We agree. We hold that Beaudet-Close invoked his right to remain silent when he declined to participate in a reenactment of the encounter and that his right to do so was infringed when the prosecution played the police interview video before the jury at trial.
On November 9, 2016, the State of Hawai‘i (the State) charged Beaudet-Close by complaint with Attempted Murder in the Second Degree and Assault in the First Degree. The charge arose from an altercation that took place between Beaudet-Close and Ault on October 28, 2016 in Kailua Kona on the island of Hawai‘i. Ault was seriously injured during the altercation.
Beaudet-Close's jury trial began on July 11, 2017.1 During opening statements, the State presented its theory that on the night of the incident, Beaudet-Close hit Ault in the face so hard that he put him into a coma. Beaudet-Close attacked Ault with so much force, the State argued, because he intended to kill Ault. The State asserted that multiple witnesses who saw the attack would testify that Beaudet-Close kicked and punched Ault, but that Ault never struck Beaudet-Close back or tried to defend himself. The State explained that Ault, who remained in a coma for weeks after the incident, suffered multiple facial fractures, a subdural hematoma
, and a traumatic brain injury.
In Beaudet-Close's opening statements, his counsel explained that Beaudet-Close was walking through a dangerous area where drugs were frequently sold and consumed when Ault approached him with a knife and said "[w]e got shit to settle." Beaudet-Close argued that he acted in self-defense and did not intend to kill Ault.
The State called retired Hawai‘i Police Department (HPD) Detective Walter Ah Mow (Detective Ah Mow). Detective Ah Mow worked for the Criminal Investigation Section in Kona in 2016 and was assigned to the "assault investigation" that is the subject of this appeal. He testified that Beaudet-Close became a person of interest after a witness identified Beaudet-Close as the assailant. Detective Ah Mow stated that on November 7, 2016, he interviewed Beaudet-Close, who had already turned himself in for the assault and was confined to a cellblock. Detective Ah Mow video recorded the interview.
According to Detective Ah Mow, Beaudet-Close told him that on the night of the incident, Ault had brandished a knife. Detective Ah Mow testified that Beaudet-Close's statement did not make sense and that he was never able to corroborate Beaudet-Close's assertion that Ault had brandished a knife. Detective Ah Mow stated, "[t]here was no knife involved."
Detective Ah Mow explained that he advised Beaudet-Close of his "rights regarding the making or not making of a statement ... [and] his rights regarding an attorney" using the standard Hawai‘i Police Department Advice of Rights form (Advice of Rights Form). Detective Ah Mow read the Advice of Rights Form to Beaudet-Close, who initialed it in various places. Beaudet-Close's initials and verbal statements indicated that he understood the Advice of Rights Form, that he waived his right to an attorney, and that he was willing to answer questions and to make a statement. The State moved a copy of the Advice of Rights Form into evidence.
The State then moved to place Exhibit 13A, a copy of the police interview video, into evidence. Beaudet-Close objected as to foundation and on Hawai‘i Rules of Evidence (HRE) Rule 4032 grounds. The circuit court overruled those objections in the following exchange:
The State published the video to the jury.
The police interview video depicts Detective Ah Mow interviewing Beaudet-Close at the Kona Police Station on November 7, 2016. First, Detective Ah Mow confirmed with Beaudet-Close that Beaudet-Close had turned himself in and had reviewed the Advice of Rights Form with the detective. Beaudet-Close verbally waived his right to remain silent and his right to the presence of an attorney, and signed the Advice of Rights Form, indicating that he waived those rights. Detective Ah Mow informed Beaudet-Close that if he chose to answer questions, he had the right to stop answering questions at any time. Beaudet-Close stated that he was willing to answer Detective Ah Mow's questions.
Next, Detective Ah Mow showed Beaudet-Close a photo lineup. Beaudet-Close was unable to identify Ault. Beaudet-Close stated that on the night of the incident he was walking when a man said his name, said "there you are, we got some shit to settle," identified himself as Ault, and lunged at Beaudet-Close with a knife. Beaudet-Close explained that he kicked and punched Ault and succeeded in kicking the knife out of Ault's hand. Beaudet-Close asserted that he did not use any weapons, but that he punched Ault once and kicked Ault seven to eight times, including two or three kicks to the head. Beaudet-Close stated that he then called the police.
Beaudet-Close stated that he had never met Ault before, but that he had heard Ault was "out to look for him" because of Beaudet-Close's ex-girlfriend.
After Beaudet-Close explained the altercation and the events surrounding it, Detective Ah Mow requested that Beaudet-Close participate in a video reconstruction of the altercation at the scene "because I want your side of the story." Detective Ah Mow explained that Beaudet-Close did not have to participate if he did not want to participate. After Beaudet-Close stated that he was scared, Detective Ah Mow again told him that he did not have to participate in the reenactment. Beaudet-Close continued that he was afraid for his life and for his family because he thought Ault's friends might try to seek revenge.
Detective Ah Mow stated, Beaudet-Close replied, "right now I'm not comfortable with that."
Beaudet-Close continued that if he had known Ault would be at the scene of the altercation that night, he would have parked somewhere else and walked a different way. Detective Ah Mow told Beaudet-Close that he had no further questions and told Beaudet-Close that since the authorities were not sure about the extent of Ault's injuries, the investigation was still ongoing. Beaudet-Close again expressed that he feared for his family. Detective Ah Mow ended the interview.
On July 13, 2017, the day the jury saw the video of Beaudet-Close's interview, Beaudet-Close filed a Motion for Mistrial. Beaudet-Close argued that the admission of his "refusal to provide statements and cooperate in a ‘scene reconstruction’ " in the police interview video was "plainly impermissible." Beaudet-Close asserted that the only reason the prosecutor would have played the portion of the video where Beaudet-Close refuses to participate in the scene reconstruction was to imply Beaudet-Close's guilt. Beaudet-Close concluded that when "the State knowingly played for the jury [footage of Beaudet-Close] choosing to invoke his right to remain silent, refuse [to answer] future statements and decline to participate in furthering the Hawaii Police Department's investigation," the State "violated [Beaudet-Close's] rights against compelled self-incrimination guaranteed by article I, section 10 of the Hawaii Constitution."
At trial the following morning, the circuit court...
To continue reading
Request your trial