Lewandowski v. State
| Decision Date | 14 April 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. S97A0075,S97A0075 |
| Parties | , 97 FCDR 1253 LEWANDOWSKI, v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Jeffrey R. Sliz, Lawrenceville, Sherriann H. Hicks, Duluth, for Lewandowski.
Peter J. Skandalakis, Dist. Atty., Beth Attaway, Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept. of Law, Atlanta, Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Ben Linz Leutwyler, III, Asst. Dist. Atty., Lawrenceville, for State.
Michael J. Lewandowski appeals his convictions for the aggravated assaults of his young son and daughter, the malice murder by stabbing of the children's mother, Kathleen Reppen, and possession of a knife during the commission of a felony. 1 We affirm.
The evidence, viewed in favor of the verdicts, revealed that Lewandowski lived with Kathleen Reppen and their two small children, and that the couple was experiencing financial problems and difficulties in their relationship. There were episodes of domestic violence in which the police were called to the home. On January 14, 1995, Reppen summoned police and charged that Lewandowski had pushed and choked her. The officer on the scene observed that Reppen had red marks on her neck and arrested Lewandowski. After his release from incarceration, Lewandowski returned to the home. Lewandowski suspected that Reppen was involved with others, and on February 7, 1995, related his suspicions to a co-worker, stating that Reppen "[knew] not to do that." The co-worker also heard Lewandowski mutter, "I'll hurt her" or "kill her."
The next evening, February 8, 1995, a neighbor's son heard Reppen's cries for help from the upstairs window of the couple's residence. Reppen pleaded that the police be called because Lewandowski was armed with knives and was holding her and the children hostage. The police arrived to hear terrified screaming. After an officer beat on the door several times, Lewandowski repeatedly yelled, "If you don't go away, I'll kill them all." The police forced open the door and found Lewandowski standing at the top of the stairs. He stated, "The bitch got what she deserved." The police removed several knives from Lewandowski and found Reppen and the two children injured and bleeding from multiple stab wounds. Reppen died a short time later after having endured 19 knife wounds, three of which were fatal. A search of the residence disclosed the telephone concealed inside the clothes dryer and the remaining kitchen knives hidden behind a chair.
Lewandowski was evaluated by psychologist Shaffer and initially indicated the intent to seek a defense of mental illness or insanity; however, he later withdrew any such defense. Lewandowski defended on the basis of provocation and testified at trial that he did not recall stabbing Reppen or his children.
1. The evidence was sufficient to enable a rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Lewandowski did not act with provocation in stabbing Reppen or the children and that he was guilty of the crimes charged. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979).
2. The trial court did not err in refusing to admit the psychological evaluation testimony of Dr. Shaffer. Lewandowski maintains that evidence of Reppen's adulterous conduct and its effect on him were critical to his claim of voluntary manslaughter, and that in order for the jury to properly understand the psychological and emotional impact Reppen's conduct had on him, the jury had to hear Shaffer's evaluation of Lewandowski's mental state at the time of the crimes. But Lewandowski rejected defenses of insanity or mental illness at the time of the stabbings; therefore, the evidence was irrelevant to the state of mind necessary to determine guilt....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hall v. Lewis
...was sufficient to excite the deadly passion in the particular defendant. [Cits.]” (Emphasis in original.) Lewandowski v. State, 267 Ga. 831, 832(2), 483 S.E.2d 582 (1997). See also Nelson v. State, 254 Ga. 611, 615(3), 331 S.E.2d 554 (1985) (“ ‘Mental abnormality or mere weakness of mind is......
-
Porter v. State
...contends we have overlooked the Supreme Court's decisions in Selman v. State, 267 Ga. 198, 475 S.E.2d 892 (1996) and Lewandowski v. State, 267 Ga. 831, 483 S.E.2d 582 (1997). Contrary to the State's contention, we considered these cases carefully and concluded that they did not demand the r......
-
Bailey v. State
...of no moment whether the provocation was sufficient to excite the deadly passion in the particular defendant." Lewandowski v. State , 267 Ga. 831, 832 (2), 483 S.E.2d 582 (1997) ; OCGA § 16-5-2 (a). The reasonable person remains our barometer.We thus evaluate the alleged provocation evidenc......
-
Johnson v. State
...is of no moment whether the provocation was sufficient to excite the deadly passion in the particular defendant,” Lewandowski v. State,267 Ga. 831, 832, 483 S.E.2d 582 (1997). Thus, we must evaluate the alleged provocation evidence with respect to its effect on a reasonable person, putting ......
-
Stephen Michael Ian Kunen, Superhuman in the Octagon, Imperfect in the Courtroom: Assessing the Culpability of Martial Artists Who Kill During Street Fights
...person and the defender could not have cooled off or regained self-control, then these elements will not bar theLewandowski v. State, 483 S.E.2d 582, 583 (Ga. 1997).Courts find an act legally sufficient to constitute provocation if a reasonable person could be provoked into killing in this ......