State v. Cook
| Decision Date | 26 May 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 25408.,25408. |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE of West Virginia, Plaintiff Below, Appellee, v. Brenda S. COOK, Defendant Below, Appellant. |
William D. Moomau, Prosecuting Attorney for Hardy County, Moorefield, West Virginia, Attorney for Appellee.
Daniel R. James, F. Cody Pancake III, Barr, James & Pancake, Keyser, West Virginia, Attorneys for Appellant.
Appellant herein and defendant below, Brenda S. Cook, appeals the January 9, 1998, order of the Circuit Court of Hardy County sentencing her to twenty-five years of imprisonment after a Hardy County jury found her guilty of second degree murder. Although Ms. Cook raises several issues on appeal to this Court, we find that one of the issues she raises, whether the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she did not act in defense of another, is dispositive of the entire case. Having reviewed the arguments of the parties, the record presented for our consideration on appeal and the pertinent authorities, we find that Ms. Cook presented sufficient evidence to require the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she did not act in the defense of another when she used deadly force against the victim. The State having failed to carry its burden on this issue, we conclude that the conviction and sentence for second degree murder must be vacated. We further remand this case for entry of a judgment of acquittal.
Brenda S. Cook is forty years old and is married to Gerald Cook. Since 1979, the Cooks have lived in a trailer home on Dover Hollow Road near Moorefield, West Virginia. In May of 1994, the Cooks purchased a two acre tract of land contiguous to their trailer.1 The two acre tract of land was bound by a road called Hickory Ridge Road. Hickory Ridge Road was used for ingress and egress by several families living in the area.2
The tragic event in this case has its genesis on Hickory Ridge Road. Shortly after the Cooks purchased the two acre tract of land, they were harassed and threatened by a few neighbors living in the area. The problems were due, in part, to the Cooks' placement of a fence and rocks along the edge of their property on Hickory Ridge Road even though there was no evidence at trial indicating that the fence and rocks prevented the normal ingress and egress of residents in the area.
One of the individuals who harassed and threatened the Cooks was the victim, Homer Buckler.3 Mr. Buckler was a huge man, standing 6'4" and weighing in excess of 300 pounds.4 Evidence at trial revealed that the Cooks' fence along Hickory Ridge Road was torn down, roofing nails were placed in their driveway, and piles of dirt and rocks were tossed onto their property.5 In 1995, an unknown person forged Mr. Cook's signature on a letter threatening the President of the United States. The United States Secret Service investigated the matter and exonerated Mr. Cook after concluding that he did not write the letter and that his signature on the letter had been forged. The Cooks identified Mr. Buckler as a possible suspect, but the investigation was determined.
During the night of December 23, 1996, a loud explosion shook the home of the Cooks. An investigation of the explosion was made by the United States Secret Service. It was determined that Mr. Buckler and several of his friends had exploded a homemade bomb constructed with black gunpowder.6 No one was injured as a result of the explosion. That investigation concluded without charges being filed.
Evidence was also introduced which showed that the Cooks sought legal help to prevent harassment and intimidation by Mr. Buckler and others.7 Law enforcement agencies were contacted and letters were sent to state government officials asking for help to stop Mr. Buckler and others from intimidating the Cook family.8 In particular, after the Cooks' fence was torn down, the Cooks contacted the Hardy County Sheriff. An investigation followed resulting in Mr. Buckler agreeing to apologize to the Cooks. However, instead of apologizing, Mr. Buckler visited the Cooks and threatened to kill them if they ever again called the authorities regarding his conduct.9
On May 7, 1997, Mrs. Cook telephoned Trooper Tom Wood to ascertain the status of an investigation into the vandalism of the Cooks' nearby cabin. Trooper Wood indicated that he was going to come out to the area to speak with Mr. Buckler about the matter. Shortly after the telephone conversation with Trooper Wood, Mrs. Cook heard a truck engine racing outside her home. She looked outside and saw Mr. Buckler throwing rocks onto her property in the direction of her husband, Mr. Cook.
Mr. Cook testified that he approached Mr. Buckler and asked him not to throw the rocks onto his property. During this time, Mrs. Cook loaded a shotgun and walked outside. Mrs. Cook fired a warning shot into the air in an effort to get Mr. Buckler to leave the area. After firing the shot, she proceeded to walk hurriedly to her husband's side. Upon approaching her husband and Mr. Buckler, Mrs. Cook pleaded with Mr. Buckler to leave them alone. Mr. Buckler would not listen. Mrs. Cook then loaded another shell into the shotgun. Mr. Buckler turned to Mrs. Cook and stated, "What are you going to do, shoot me?" Mrs. Cook testified that she responded, "No sir, Homer, I didn't come up here to hurt anybody, just please leave us alone." Mrs. Cook then informed Mr. Buckler that she had already called the police. Mr. Buckler immediately looked at Mr. Cook and stated,
Mr. Cook turned from Mr. Buckler and began walking away. Clayton Brent, a neighbor of the Cooks and an eyewitness to the events, testified as to what he heard and saw regarding Mr. Cook's attempt to walk away:10
Mrs. Cook testified that as Mr. Cook walked away, Mr. Buckler attacked him and spun him around. At which point, Mr. Cook took a swing at Mr. Buckler. The evidence indicated that Mr. Buckler then proceeded to throw Mr. Cook to the ground and began beating him. As Mr. Buckler beat Mr. Cook, who was defenseless and pleading for mercy, Mrs. Cook rushed to help her husband. Mrs. Cook held the shotgun in one hand and attempted to pull Mr. Buckler off of her husband. Mr. Buckler paused long enough to strike Mrs. Cook and rip her shirt open. Two eyewitnesses, Norma Gibson and Rebla Jackson, testified that Mr. Buckler struck Mrs. Cook.11 Norma Gibson testified as follows:
Rebla Jackson testified as follows:
Mrs. Cook testified that after she was struck by Mr. Buckler she continued pleading with him to stop beating her husband. Mr. Buckler ignored her and continued beating Mr. Cook.12 Mrs. Cook testified that she was afraid her husband would be killed, so she aimed the shotgun at Mr. Buckler's right arm and fired. The shot landed under Mr. Buckler's right armpit. Mr. Buckler fell off Mr. Cook. However, Mr. Buckler attempted to get up. Mrs. Cook reloaded the shotgun and prepared to fire again. She did not fire a second shot because Mr. Buckler fell to the ground.
Clayton Brent was the first person to arrive at the scene. He testified as follows:
Q. When you were running up there to your mother's house, do you remember Brenda yelling to you, "Call an ambulance?"
Mr. Buckler lived for a short period of time after the gunshot. He was taken to Memorial Hospital and Medical Center in Cumberland, Maryland, where he was pronounced dead. Subsequently, a grand jury rendered a one count indictment charging Mrs. Cook with first degree murder. The trial began on August 11, 1997. On August 14, 1997, a jury returned a verdict finding Mrs. Cook guilty of second degree murder. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Harden
...grounds to believe, and did believe, the danger imminent." More recently, we addressed the reasonableness inquiry in State v. Cook, 204 W.Va. 591, 515 S.E.2d 127 (1999), where we concluded that the two-part inquiry required a finding that a defendant "actually believe that [she] is in dange......
-
Flack v. Ballard
...error.12 There is no such legal concept. Self-defense and defense of another are two separate doctrines. See State v. Cook, 204 W.Va. 591, 598, 515 S.E.2d 127, 134 (1999) (discussing both doctrines). While Petitioner sets forth case law regarding the doctrine of self-defense, he does not de......
-
O'dell v. Robert
...of a close relationship, or three unfriendly sisters. See 4 Powell on Real Property § 34.10[2][c]. 27. For example, in State v. Cook, 204 W.Va. 591, 515 S.E.2d 127 (1999), the defendant and her husband built a fence along the edge of their property. The defendant's neighbors tore down the f......
-
Feliciano v. 7-Eleven, Inc.
...no additional affirmation in this case." State v. Miller, 85 W.Va. 326, 329, 102 S.E. 303, 304 (1919). See also State v. Cook, 204 W.Va. 591, 598, 515 S.E.2d 127, 134 (1999) ("Our cases have succinctly articulated the development and scope of the doctrine of self-defense and the use of dead......
-
Mark L. Rienzi, the Constitutional Right Not to Kill
...law, that a person is justified in usingforce to protect a third party from an aggressor’s use of force); see also State v. Cook, 515 S.E.2d 127, 133 (W. Va. 1999) (holding that the intervenor’s right to defend a third party parallels the third party’s right of self- defense, allowing the i......
-
Georgia's Safe Harbor Ruling for Affirmative Defenses in Criminal Cases Should Be Revisited
...defendant has produced some evidence of the defense") (internal quotations and citations omitted). [Page 57] West Virgina: State v. Cook, 515 S.E.2d 127, 136 (W. Va. 1999) (burden of persuasion remains with State for defense of others, as with self-defense); State v. Hinkle, 489 S.E.2d 257,......
-
Stephen Michael Ian Kunen, Superhuman in the Octagon, Imperfect in the Courtroom: Assessing the Culpability of Martial Artists Who Kill During Street Fights
...woman’s syndrome cases and is discussed in Part II infra.People v. Batac, 631 N.E.2d 373, 384 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994).E.g., State v. Cook, 515 S.E.2d 127, 137 (W. Va. 1999) (“Our Court has previously held that the amount of force that can be used in self-defense is that normally one can return......
-
§ 19.01 General Rule
...in which D killed a dog purportedly threatening the safety of a child, a defense-of-other instruction can be raised).[2] State v. Cook, 515 S.E.2d 127, 133 (W. Va. 1999).[3] State v. Bolden, 371 S.W.3d 802, 805 (Mo. 2012).[4] E.g., Utah Code § 76-2-402(1)(a) (2015); Maye v. State, 49 So. 3d......