State v. Doucette

• Decision Date: 02 July 2001
• Docket Number: No. 99-388.,99-388.
• Citation: 776 A.2d 744
• Parties: The STATE of New Hampshire v. Christopher DOUCETTE.
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

776 A.2d 744

The STATE of New Hampshire v.Christopher DOUCETTE.

No. 99-388.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire.

July 2, 2001.

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Philip T. McLaughlin, attorney general(Kelly A. Ayotte, assistant attorney general, on the brief and orally), for the State.

Jenifer Bensinger Ackerman, assistant appellate defender, of Concord, by brief, and Richard Samdperil, assistant appellate defender, orally, for the defendant.

BROCK, C.J.

The defendant, Christopher Doucette, was convicted on one count of second degree murder, RSA 630:1-b (1996), and one count of conspiracy to commit murder, RSA 629:3(1996).On appeal, he argues that the Trial Court(McHugh, J.) erred when it failed to instruct the jury that it must find that the State proved the specific acts alleged in the indictment.We affirm.

Two young women, Leeann Millius and Kimberly Farrah, were stabbed to death at Hedgehog Pond Park in Salem in September of 1997.Eric Jeleniewski, James Grant and Christopher Doucette were arrested in connection with the murders.

Grant initially told police that Jeleniewski had killed Farrah, the defendant had killed Millius by stabbing her in the neck, and that Grant had inflicted superficial wounds to Millius' abdomen after her death by poking her lightly with the knife.On December 3, 1997, the defendant was indicted for first degree murder.

During a subsequent meeting with prosecutors, Grant revealed that he, not the defendant, had stabbed Millius in the throat, causing her death, and that it was the defendant who had inflicted the superficial wounds to Millius' abdomen.On November 5, 1998, the defendant was re-indicted.Count I of the new indictment alleged:

On or about September 13, 1997, Christopher Doucette, acting in concert with James Grant, purposely caused the death of Leeann Millius by repeatedly stabbing her in the neck and abdomen at Hedgehog Park in Salem.

Count II of the indictment charged the defendant with conspiracy to commit murder.

Grant testified that on September 12, 1997, he, Jeleniewski and the defendant drove to Salem to see Leeann Millius.At some point, Grant and Jeleniewski took a knife from Millius' dresser.Grant gave the knife to Jeleniewski who gave it to the defendant.The defendant put the knife in Jeleniewski's car.

Later that day, Grant, Jeleniewski and the defendant accompanied Millius and her friend, Kimberly Farrah, to a playground in Salem.Millius and the defendant went for a walk in the woods.Farrah left Jeleniewski and Grant to find Millius and the defendant.During this time, according to Grant, Jeleniewski told him that he had decided to kill the women, that he had discussed the idea with the defendant, and had obtained his approval.

Shortly thereafter, Grant left to get a sandwich.When he returned, the defendant and Jeleniewski were fighting and the women were upset.Grant testified that the fight was a fake fight designed to separate the two women.

The group returned to Millius' house and the girls went inside.According to Grant, it was during this time that the defendant and Jeleniewski discussed how they were going to separate the women and agreed that the defendant would walk off with Millius while Jeleniewski remained with Farrah.

Farrah and Millius returned to their car and the group proceeded to Hedgehog Pond Park.When they arrived, the defendant and Millius went into the woods, while Jeleniewski and Farrah went into a bathhouse.Grant remained at a picnic table.Jeleniewski stabbed Farrah to death in the bathhouse within minutes of their arrival at the park.

Grant testified that, after hearing Farrah scream, he found Millius and the defendant, and asked the defendant to check on Jeleniewski while he remained with Millius.When the defendant returned, he pulled Grant aside.Grant testified that the defendant had obtained the knife from Jeleniewski and gave it to Grant.Grant also testified that the defendant was crying and emotional, and begged Grant not to stab and kill him.According to Grant, the defendant said that the two of them had to kill Millius.When Grant told the defendanthe couldn't do it, the defendant returned with Grant to the bathhouse to look at Farrah's body.

According to Grant, he and the defendant returned to Millius, and the three walked to a picnic table near the pond.The defendant began caressing Millius' shoulders and head but then grabbed her head and tried to twist it to break her neck.When Millius jumped back, the defendant lunged at her.Grant testified that the defendant put his hands around her neck and threw her to the ground.He continued to squeeze her neck until she stopped moving.Once Millius was unconscious, the defendant told Grant to stab her.Grant stabbed Millius once or twice in the throat.When Millius screamed, the defendant kneeled on her neck for a period of time while the defendant and Grant restrained her.Then, the defendant used the knife to inflict a number of less serious wounds to Millius' neck and abdomen.

The trial court initially instructed the jury on the crime of first degree murder, in part, as follows:

As I have just indicated, ladies and gentlemen, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the acts of the defendant either caused or in concert with the acts of James Grant caused the death of another human being, namely, in this case, Leeann Millius.

Ladies and gentlemen, a defendant is guilty of first degree murder if the offense is committed by a combination of his own conduct and the acts of other people for whom he is legally accountable.A person is legally accountable for the conduct of another if, with a purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense, he aids the other person in committing it.

The indictment in this case charges that the defendant committed the crime of first degree murder by acting in concert with James Grant, a person for whom the defendant is legally accountable.Therefore, if you find that the crime of first degree murder occurred, the State must prove the defendant guilty of that first degree murder by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is accountable for the conduct of James Grant and that the offense was committed by a combination of the defendant's own acts and the acts of James Grant.

The State may prove that the defendant is legally accountable for the acts of James Grant by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant aided James Grant in committing the offense and that he did this with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the crime of first degree murder.It is not enough for the State to only prove that the defendant was physically present while James Grant, by his own conduct, committed the offense.The State must prove that the defendant committed acts to aid James Grant and that he committed acts with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission or the murder of Leeann Millius.

The court then instructed the jury on the lesser included charge of second degree murder, in pertinent part, as follows:

The definition of second degree murder has two parts.The State must prove each part of that definition beyond a reasonable doubt.The State must prove first that the defendant caused the death of another person.This means the death of another person was the direct result of either the defendant's actions solely or his actions in concert with the actions of James Grant.

Secondly, they must prove that the defendant acted knowingly.A person acts knowingly when he realizes and is aware of what he was doing and of the nature of his conduct and when he does not act through ignorance, mistake, or accident.

During the second day of deliberations, the jury sent a question to the court, asking, "To find someone guilty of second degree murder do they have to be involved with the actions that result in the death of a person?"The court answered the question as follows:

Because you have asked a question about 2nd degree murder, the Court assumes that you have unanimously agreed that the defendant is not guilty of 1st degree murder.

With respect to this case, the only difference between the elements of 1st degree murder and the elements of 2nd degree murder is the different mental state.To prove 1st degree murder the State must prove that the defendant acted purposely as that term is defined for you on pages one and two of the jury instructions concerning murder that you have.To prove 2nd degree murder, the State must prove that the defendant acted knowingly as that term is defined on page 7 of the same jury instruction.

In answer to your specific question, in order for you to find the defendant guilty of 2nd degree murder the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant caused the death of another.This means the death of another person was the direct result of either the defendant's actions solely or his actions in concert with the actions of James Grant.Acting in concert with means he acted with the purpose of promoting or facilitating the commission of the offense or he aids or agrees or attempts to aid James Grant in planning or committing the crime of murder.

No verdict was reached by the end of the day and the jury was sent home.The following morning, defense counsel asserted that the defendant had been charged solely as an accomplice and that the State was required to prove that the defendant committed the specific acts alleged in the indictment, that is, that the defendant stabbed Leeann Millius in the stomach and the throat, for the jury to find him guilty as an accomplice to second degree murder.Over the defendant's objection, the court sent a supplemental answer to the jury's question as follows:

Yesterday afternoon the Court gave you a written answer to your question concerning 2nd degree murder.The last sentence of the Court's answer dealt with the meaning of the phrase "acting in concert with."The Court should have included...