State v. Francis
| Decision Date | 22 November 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. A-1-CA-35792,A-1-CA-35792 |
| Parties | STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LIONEL FRANCIS, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of New Mexico |
This decision of the New Mexico Court of Appeals was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Appellate Reports. Refer to Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished decisions. Electronic decisions may contain computer-generated errors or other deviations from the official version filed by the Court of Appeals.
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SAN JUAN COUNTY
Hector H. Balderas, Attorney General
Santa Fe, NM
Lauren J. Wolongevicz, Assistant Attorney General
for Appellee
Bennett J. Baur, Chief Public Defender
Caitlin C.M. Smith, Assistant Appellate Defender
Santa Fe, NM
for Appellant
{1} Defendant appeals his convictions for second-degree murder, contrary to NMSA 1978, Section 30-2-1(B) (1994); negligent child abuse, contrary to NMSA 1978, Section 30-6-1(D)(1) (2009) (No Death or Great Bodily Harm); and battery on a household member, contrary to NMSA 1978, Section 30-3-15 (2008). On appeal, Defendant contends: (1) his conviction for child abuse and second-degree murder were not supported by sufficient evidence; (2) his convictions for second-degree murder and battery on a household member constitute double jeopardy; and (3) he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Because we agree with Defendant's double jeopardy argument, we reverse his conviction for battery on a household member. We affirm Defendant's remaining convictions.
{2} Because this is a memorandum opinion and the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of this case, we set forth here only a brief overview of the historical facts of this case. We reserve discussion of specific facts where necessary to our analysis.
{3} On the evening of November 10, 2013, Defendant and his girlfriend (Victim), were involved in a severe physical altercation that resulted in Victim's death. The morning after the altercation, Defendant called 911 and reported that Victim was not breathing. Farmington Police arrived at the scene, forced entry into the ground floor of Defendant's two-story apartment due to the lack of response after five minutes of pounding on the door, and found Victim laying on the living room floor covered by a sheet. Officers also discovered evidence of smeared blood, blood splatter, hair clumps, bloody rags, and alcohol bottles in the apartment. After the police forced entry, Defendant appeared at the top of the stairs with his five-month old child (Infant) in his arms and his 7-year old step-child at his side. The two children were removed from the scene and released to the New Mexico Children, Youth and Families Department (CYFD). Police arrested Defendant and described him as disheveled, smelling of alcohol, covered in what appeared to be dried blood with a swollen right hand and rug burns on his knees.
{4} Defendant was charged with the following crimes: second-degree murder, evidence tampering, negligent child abuse, and battery on a household member. At trial, the State introduced evidence of Defendant's interrogation, where Defendant confessed to details of a physical fight with Victim. Defendant's statements regarding the details of what transpired during the altercation varied over the course of the interrogation, but Defendant consistently stated that Victim accused him of infidelity and slapped him while Defendant was holding Infant, and although Defendant pushed her away and told her to stop, Victim persisted. Defendant admitted to pushing, punching, and kicking Victim several times. The State presented photographic evidence of the scene and Victim's injuries as well as testimonial evidence from officers, crime scene and medical investigators, a neighbor who heard the fighting, and a forensic pathologist who testified about the autopsy detailing Victim's injuries and cause of death. The jury convicted Defendant of second-degree murder, negligent child abuse, and battery on a household member, from which Defendant now appeals.
{5} Defendant argues there was insufficient evidence to convict him of child abuse. We disagree. "The test for sufficiency of the evidence is whether substantial evidence of either a direct or circumstantial nature exists to support a verdict of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt with respect to every element essential to a conviction." State v. Torrez, 2013-NMSC-034, ¶ 40, 305 P.3d 944 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). "Substantial evidence is that which a reasonable mind accepts as adequate to support a conclusion." State v. Huerta-Castro, 2017-NMCA-026, ¶ 24, 390 P.3d 185. "This Court evaluates the sufficiency of the evidence in a criminal case by viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, resolving all conflicts and indulging all permissible inferences in favor of upholding the conviction, and disregarding all evidence and inferences to the contrary." State v. Trujillo, 2012-NMCA-092, ¶ 5, 287 P.3d 344. "[T]he jury is free to reject efendant's version of the facts," State v. Rojo, 1999-NMSC-001, ¶ 19, 126 N.M. 438, 971 P.2d 829, and we do not "consider the merit of evidence that may have supported a [different result]." State v. Kersey, 1995-NMSC-054. ¶ 11, 120 N.M. 517, 903 P.2d 828.
{6} In this case, in order to convict Defendant of negligent child abuse by endangerment, the jury was required to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant: (1) hit and kicked Victim (Infant's mother) with Infant in close proximity; (2) by engaging in such conduct, Defendant caused Infant to be placed in a situation which endangered the life or health of Infant; and (3) Defendant showed a reckless disregard without justification for the safety or health of Infant. See § 30-6-1(D)(1) (); State v. Holt, 2016-NMSC-011, ¶ 20, 368 P.3d 409 (). The jury instructions specified that "reckless disregard" requires that Defendant's "conduct was more than merely negligent or careless[,]" and that Defendant "caused a substantial and unjustifiable risk of serious harm" to Infant, which means a law-abiding person would have behaved differently "out of concern for [Infant's] safety or health[.]"
{7} Defendant contends that the State failed to establish the "close proximity" element beyond a reasonable doubt, as required in the instructions, because the only evidence presented was Defendant's statement that Infant "was in his bouncy chair right beside us." Defendant also argues that his confession was contradictory and therefore unreliable, and that the "single statement about [Infant]'s location" was insufficient "to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that [Infant] was close enough to the violence to be endangered." We are unpersuaded.
{8} Defendant's characterization ignores the several times Defendant admitted that he was holding Infant or that Infant was nearby during the fight, as well as the severity of the beating he inflicted on Victim in their small apartment, which placed Infant directly into the extremely violent altercation, during which Infant could have easily been harmed by Defendant or Victim, who had a right to defend herself. See State v. Granillo, 2016-NMCA-094, ¶ 12, 384 P.3d 1121 (); see also State v. Arrendondo, 2012-NMSC-013, ¶ 25, 278 P.3d 517 ().
{9} As to Defendant's assertion that the confession was unreliable, we resolve all reasonable inferences in favor of the verdict and disregard all evidence and inferences that support a different result. Trujillo, 2012-NMCA-092, ¶ 5. Moreover, we note that here, Defendant placed Infant in the middle of a dangerous altercation that resulted in the death of Infant's mother. While "mere proximity to a dangerous situation [is] insufficient to support to a conviction for child abuse by endangerment[,]" the State presented sufficient evidence that Infant was at risk of harm during the altercation. Trujillo, 2002-NMCA-100, ¶ 18. Defendant created a substantial and unjustifiable risk of serious harm to Infant because a law-abiding person would have behaved differently to keep Infant out of danger, especially considering the increasingly severe nature of the fight.
{10} Therefore, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude that the evidence sufficed to support Defendant's child abuse conviction. See State v. Chavez, 2009-NMSC-035, ¶ 26, 146 N.M. 434, 211 P.3d 891 ().
{11} Defendant alternatively argues it was plain error for the district court to admit (1) Detective Jason Solomon's testimony that he observed two bruises on Infant's back, and (2) photographs of those bruises, claiming such evidence was irrelevant and tainted the jury's...
To continue reading
Request your trial