People v. Unrein

Decision Date20 October 1983
Docket NumberNo. 82CA1121,82CA1121
Citation677 P.2d 951
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frank Peter UNREIN, Jr., Defendant-Appellant. . I
CourtColorado Court of Appeals

Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. Howe, Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H. Forman, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Maureen Phelan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.

C.J. Berardini, P.C., C.J. Berardini, Brian J. Berardini, Denver, George Fischer, Brighton, for defendant-appellant.

METZGER, Judge.

Defendant, Frank Peter Unrein, Jr., seeks reversal of his convictions for second degree murder, § 18-3-103, C.R.S.1973 (1982 Cum.Supp.), second degree kidnapping, § 18-3-302(1), C.R.S.1973 (1982 Cum.Supp.), and criminal menacing, § 18-3-206, C.R.S.1973 (1982 Cum.Supp.). We affirm.

The facts are as follows. Defendant and his wife, Alta Unrein, separated in late 1981 after a brief but stormy marriage. On January 5, 1982, defendant asked Alta to lunch, but during the meal an argument between them ensued, and Alta left the restaurant without eating.

That evening Alta called her home from work and found that her boyfriend was at her house with the flu. She told him to go to bed instead of going out in the cold.

When she arrived home from work about 11:30 p.m., defendant pulled his car behind hers in the driveway and said he was "going in." He grabbed her, put a gun to her head, shoved her into the house and through the house to their bedroom. When he let go of her to turn on the light, she saw her boyfriend, the victim sitting on the side of the bed; then she fled and hid. After a few minutes, she heard a gunshot. The victim died four days later of a gunshot wound to the head, fired at a distance of three to six inches. He had also been severely beaten about the head and upper body.

Defendant was charged with murder in the first degree, and with kidnapping and menacing Alta.

I.

Defendant first contends that the trial court erred in not admitting a tape recording of his phone call to the police minutes after the incident, in which he stated that the shooting was accidental. Defendant offered this evidence for the limited purpose of establishing that the phone call had been made. However, that fact had been adduced in the prosecution's case-in-chief, and was uncontradicted. Defendant's evidence, therefore, was cumulative. The admission or rejection of cumulative evidence is within the trial court's discretion and its ruling will not be overturned by this court unless an abuse of discretion clearly appears. CRE 403; People v. Sexton, 192 Colo. 81, 555 P.2d 1151 (1976). Here, the trial court properly exercised its discretion.

II.

Defendant next asserts that the trial court erred in denying his pre-trial motion to sever the first degree murder count from the counts of kidnapping and assault. That motion alleged prejudice to him, pursuant to Crim.P. 14, since defendant's wife, victim of the kidnapping and assault, would be allowed to testify to statements he made to her at lunch the day of the incident which could be construed as constituting a motive for the charge of first degree murder.

It has long been the case that one spouse may not testify against the other except for situations involving "A crime committed by one against the other." Section § 13-90-107(1)(a), C.R.S.1973. Here, the trial court allowed the testimony of the lunchtime conversation as evidence of defendant's motive for the kidnapping and murder which occurred several hours later. In our view, the trial court did not err in its ruling, since the evidence concerned one criminal episode, in which she was one of the victims. People v. McGregor, 635 P.2d 912 (Colo.App.1981).

III.

...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Marriage of Herrera, In re
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • March 2, 1989
    ...4, 1987. The mother's offer of proof regarding this testimony indicates that it would have been merely cumulative. See People v. Unrein, 677 P.2d 951 (Colo.App.1983); CRE The mother further contends that the trial court erred in requiring her to post a security bond and schedule makeup visi......
  • People v. Salas, 93CA0771
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • December 15, 1994
    ...within the sound discretion of the trial court, and its ruling will not be disturbed absent a clear abuse of discretion. People v. Unrein, 677 P.2d 951 (Colo.App.1983). Here, there was no such abuse of discretion because the testimony was relevant to a material issue in the case. The child'......
  • People v. Galloway
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • August 21, 1986
    ...value against the prejudicial effect of cumulative evidence is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. See People v. Unrein, 677 P.2d 951 (Colo.App.1983); People v. Abbott, 638 P.2d 781 Although the hearsay evidence was cumulative to the victim's testimony, the trial court act......
4 books & journal articles
  • ARTICLE 3
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association C.R.S. on Family and Juvenile Law (2022 ed.) (CBA) Title 18 Criminal Code
    • Invalid date
    ...as an element of kidnapping, but merely some movement which substantially increases the risk of harm to the victim. People v. Unrein, 677 P.2d 951 (Colo. App. 1983); People v. Fuller, 791 P.2d 702 (Colo. 1990). The asportation element of second degree kidnapping is the movement by the defen......
  • Rule 403 EXCLUSION OF RELEVANT EVIDENCE ON GROUNDS OF PREJUDICE, CONFUSION, OR WASTE OF TIME
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Rules and C.R.S. of Evidence Annotated (CBA)
    • Invalid date
    ...847 (1980); People in Interest of R.G., 630 P.2d 89 (Colo. App. 1981); People v. Dillon, 633 P.2d 504 (Colo. App. 1981); People v. Unrein, 677 P.2d 951 (Colo. App. 1983); People v. Guffie, 749 P.2d 976 (Colo. App. 1987). The admission of a photograph of the dead victim for purposes of ident......
  • ARTICLE 90 WITNESSES
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association Colorado Rules and C.R.S. of Evidence Annotated (CBA)
    • Invalid date
    ...exclude a spouse's testimony in a case involving child abuse. People v. Corbett, 656 P.2d 687 (Colo. 1983). Applied in People v. Unrein, 677 P.2d 951 (Colo. App. 1983).III. ATTORNEY. A. In General. Attorney-client privilege originated in common law, and it is now codified in most jurisdicti......
  • ARTICLE 3 OFFENSES AGAINST THE PERSON
    • United States
    • Colorado Bar Association C.R.S. on Family and Juvenile Law (CBA) Title 18 Criminal Code
    • Invalid date
    ...as an element of kidnapping, but merely some movement which substantially increases the risk of harm to the victim. People v. Unrein, 677 P.2d 951 (Colo. App. 1983); People v. Fuller, 791 P.2d 702 (Colo. 1990). The asportation element of second degree kidnapping is the movement by the defen......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT