Adams v. State
| Citation | 2023 WY 85 |
| Docket Number | S-22-0285 |
| Decision Date | 24 August 2023 |
| Parties | JETT GARRIOTT ADAMS, Appellant (Defendant), v. THE STATE OF WYOMING, Appellee (Plaintiff). |
| Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
Appeal from the District Court of Carbon County The Honorable Dawnessa A. Snyder, Judge
Representing Appellant: Office of the State Public Defender Diane Lozano, State Public Defender; Kirk A. Morgan, Chief Appellate Counsel. Argument by Mr. Morgan.
Representing Appellee: Bridget L. Hill, Attorney General Jenny L. Craig, Deputy Attorney General; Kristen R. Jones, Senior Assistant Attorney General. Argument by Ms. Jones.
Before FOX, C.J., and KAUTZ, BOOMGAARDEN, GRAY, and FENN JJ.
[¶1] Following a bench trial, the district court convicted Jett Garriott Adams of attempted murder, aggravated assault and battery, and other charges stemming from a high-speed car chase and shootout with law enforcement. On appeal, Mr. Adams asserts the State committed prosecutorial misconduct when it presented certain testimony from the psychologists who conducted his competency and mental health evaluations pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 7-11-303 and 7-11-304 (LexisNexis 2023). Finding no misconduct, we affirm.
[¶2] We restate the single issue presented as:
Did the State commit prosecutorial misconduct by introducing statements and information obtained during Mr. Adams's competency evaluation and subsequent mental illness or deficiency evaluation?
[¶3] The events leading to Mr. Adams's arrest and conviction began in Kansas City, Missouri. Mr. Adams was serving a period of probation after a felony conviction. He received notice of an alleged probation violation but decided not to attend his probation revocation hearing. Instead, he purchased a firearm and made plans to buy more weapons. He testified he intended to shoot law enforcement, the prosecutor, and the judge in Missouri to avoid going to prison, but a friend talked him out of that plan and suggested he leave Missouri instead. The day before his probation revocation hearing, Mr. Adams cut off his GPS monitor and began driving to Idaho to start a new life, get a job, and "lay low" in the hopes that law enforcement would not find him.
[¶4] While driving west across Wyoming on Interstate 80, Mr. Adams exceeded the posted speed limit in a variable speed zone on icy roads. Highway Patrol Trooper Hobbs observed the speeding violation and initiated a traffic stop. Trooper Hobbs asked Mr. Adams for his license, registration, and insurance. Mr. Adams could not produce his registration or insurance. Trooper Hobbs asked Mr. Adams to come with him to his patrol vehicle. Mr. Adams feared that Trooper Hobbs had seen his firearm or ammunition in the car and that Trooper Hobbs would soon know he was a felon in possession of a firearm, arrest him, and take him to jail. Instead of going to the patrol car as directed, Mr. Adams sped away.
[¶5] A short high-speed chase followed. Mr. Adams soon pulled over again. Trooper Hobbs treated this stop as a felony stop, thus drawing his sidearm when he opened the door of his vehicle. Mr. Adams exited his vehicle, holding his own firearm. A shootout ensued. Trooper Hobbs remained at his vehicle, at times either crouching or standing behind the open driver's side door for cover and concealment. The shootout was short in duration but long enough for both participants to empty their magazines: Trooper Hobbs fired sixteen rounds and Mr. Adams fired seven rounds. Multiple bullets hit Trooper Hobbs's vehicle close to the driver's side door. Some shrapnel cut his forehead, but neither person was shot. Mr. Adams re-entered his vehicle and sped away.
[¶6] A second high-speed chase began, with a Carbon County Sheriff's Deputy and another Highway Patrol vehicle joining Trooper Hobbs in pursuit of Mr. Adams. The vehicles exceeded 100 miles per hour, often swerving or using the emergency lane to avoid other vehicles and semi-truck traffic. During this chase, Mr. Adams continued shooting at Trooper Hobbs through the back windshield of Mr. Adams's vehicle. Mr. Adams discharged his weapon at least 28 times.
[¶7] Mr. Adams eventually drove off the interstate highway, through a fence, and across the roadless desert, untracked snow, and sagebrush. The Troopers and Deputy followed in the Deputy's four-wheel drive vehicle. Mr. Adams's car soon stopped, unable to proceed in the terrain and snow. He continued fleeing on foot but left his gun in the car. He promptly surrendered when law enforcement caught up to him.
[¶8] The State charged Mr. Adams with ten counts: attempted murder (against Trooper Hobbs), two counts of aggravated assault and battery, felony interference with a peace officer, felony property destruction, aggravated fleeing or eluding a police officer, use of a firearm while committing a felony, reckless driving, reckless endangerment, and speeding.
[¶9] Mr. Adams initially pleaded not guilty to all charges, and defense counsel asked for a competency evaluation pursuant to Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 7-11-303. The court suspended proceedings while Dr. Paul Murdock conducted the competency evaluation. Dr. Murdock found Mr. Adams was competent to proceed.
[¶10] Mr. Adams then entered a new plea of not guilty by reason of mental illness or deficiency (NGMI), requiring an evaluation pursuant to Wyo. Stat. § 7-11-304. Dr. Renee Wilkinson conducted the NGMI evaluation. Dr. Wilkinson diagnosed Mr. Adams with depression, anxiety, and borderline personality disorder but concluded Mr. Adams did not lack the mental capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct or to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law at the time of the alleged events. Defense counsel then asked the Public Defender's office to pay for a second NGMI evaluation. That request was denied. Mr. Adams also wrote a pro se letter to the court asking for assistance to obtain a second evaluation. No second evaluation occurred.
[¶11] Mr. Adams then requested a bench trial, and the State ultimately agreed to try this case without a jury. The State presented the testimony of Dr. Wilkinson. Trooper Hobbs and the two other law enforcement officers involved in the second high-speed chase also testified, as did other witnesses related to the arrest, the investigation, and the alleged property damage. The State also played Mr. Adams's post-arrest interview with the Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation and law enforcement's dash cam video to the court. Following the close of the State's evidence, Mr. Adams testified for several hours in his own defense. He also presented the testimony of Ms. Rice, a mental health examiner at the local jail. The State then called one rebuttal witness, Dr. Murdock. Defense counsel cross-examined Dr. Murdock and the State followed with limited redirect examination.
[¶12] The court took the matter under advisement at the conclusion of the three-day trial. In its written verdict and decision letter issued a few weeks later, the court found Mr. Adams guilty on nine counts. It sentenced Mr. Adams to life in prison without the possibility of parole on the charges of attempted murder and aggravated assault and battery, with consecutive sentences of various lengths on the other counts. This appeal timely followed to challenge, as noted above, whether the prosecutor improperly introduced certain information from the two mental health examiners.
[¶13] Mr. Adams did not contemporaneously object to the prosecutor's questioning of either examiner, so we review the alleged misconduct for plain error. King v. State, 2023 WY 36, ¶ 33, 527 P.3d 1229, 1242 (Wyo. 2023). Mr. Adams has the burden to show (1) the record is clear about the incident alleged as error; (2) a violation of a clear and unequivocal rule of law; and (3) he was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice. Id. (quoting Ridinger v. State, 2021 WY 4, ¶ 33, 478 P.3d 1160, 1168 (Wyo. 2021)); Lott v. State, 2022 WY 143, ¶ 10, 519 P.3d 646, 649 (Wyo. 2022).
[¶14] The record is clear the State called Dr. Wilkinson and Dr Murdock to testify at trial, and their testimony included statements and information they obtained during their respective examinations of Mr. Adams. Thus, we proceed to consider whether the State elicited that testimony in violation of a clear and unequivocal rule of law and whether Mr. Adams was denied a substantial right resulting in material prejudice. King, 2023 WY 36, ¶ 33, 527 P.3d at 1242 (citation omitted).
[¶15] We have characterized prosecutorial misconduct as:
[A] prosecutor's improper or illegal act (or failure to act), especially involving an attempt to persuade the jury to wrongly convict a defendant or assess an unjustified punishment. Prosecutorial misconduct claims are not intended to provide an avenue for tactical sandbagging of the trial courts, but rather, to address gross prosecutorial improprieties that have deprived a criminal defendant of his or her right to a fair trial. A prosecutor's conduct is not misconduct unless he knew or should have known it would deprive the defendant of the right to a fair trial. It is something more than evidentiary error. We distinguish prosecutorial misconduct from evidentiary error because otherwise, any evidentiary error which favors the State would be considered prosecutorial misconduct.
Id. ¶ 16, 527 P.3d at 1238 (citations and internal quotations omitted).
[¶16] The distinction between evidentiary error and prosecutorial misconduct is an important one-the gravamen of Mr Adams's appeal is that certain testimony by two mental health evaluators was inadmissible evidence pursuant to statutory limitations in Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 7-11-303 and 7-11-304. Misconduct occurs when a prosecutor knowingly...
To continue reading
Request your trial