State v. Hill
Decision Date | 30 October 1987 |
Docket Number | No. 59793,59793 |
Citation | 744 P.2d 1228,242 Kan. 68 |
Parties | STATE of Kansas, Appellee, v. Lawonna R. HILL, Appellant. |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. The trial court has an affirmative duty to instruct on all lesser included offenses established by the evidence. K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 21-3107(3).
2. Where the trial court refuses to give an instruction on lesser included offenses or on self-defense, the evidence supporting such instruction must be viewed on appeal in the light most favorable to the defendant.
3. An instruction on lesser included offenses must be given even though the evidence supporting those offenses may be weak and inconclusive and based solely on the testimony of the defendant.
4. The trial court must instruct the jury on self-defense if there is any evidence tending to establish self-defense even though the evidence may be slight and consist solely of the defendant's testimony.
5. Murder in the second degree requires proof of the intent to kill and therefore is a specific intent crime. Where the defendant is charged with murder in the second degree, evidence of a diminished capacity is admissible for the limited purpose of negating specific intent.
6. In an action where the defendant was convicted of murder in the second degree, the record is examined and it is held: The trial court erred (1) in refusing to instruct on the lesser included offenses of voluntary and involuntary manslaughter; (2) in refusing to instruct on self-defense; and (3) in excluding expert testimony as to diminished capacity. It is further held that the trial court did not err in admitting photographs of the deceased's body into evidence, nor did the conduct of the trial judge prejudice the substantial rights of the defendant or deny her a fair trial.
Benjamin C. Wood, Chief Appellate Defender, argued the cause and was on the brief, for appellant.
Geary N. Gorup, Asst. Dist. Atty., argued the cause, and Clark V. Owens, Dist. Atty., and Robert T. Stephan, Atty. Gen., were with him on the brief, for appellee.
This is a direct appeal in which the defendant, Lawonna R. Hill, was tried before a jury and convicted of second-degree murder. K.S.A. 21-3402. She was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 15 years to life.
At approximately 3:00 a.m. on February 1, 1986, the Wichita Police Department began to receive reports of a shooting at 9th and Washington in Wichita, Kansas. At the same time, the defendant arrived at the Wichita police station. She told police officers there that she was the one who had done the shooting. Police officers responding to the reported scene of the shooting found a black female lying upon the floor in the hallway of a private club. The victim of the shooting, Patricia A. Jackson, was pronounced dead at the scene by members of the Sedgwick County coroner's office. The cause of death was a gunshot wound to the chest.
The defendant turned over to the police the gun used in the shooting, a .22 caliber pistol. Police officers informed defendant of her Miranda rights and she consented to interrogation by the police. Immediately prior to the interrogation, police officers informed her that Jackson had died. The police officer conducting the interrogation stated that defendant "gasped and weeped [sic ] ... for a period of time" in apparent "sorrow or shock." The tape recording made of the interrogation formed almost the entire basis of the State's case.
During the course of the interrogation, the defendant stated that she, along with her brother, Keith Hill; Keith's friend, Dana Love; and defendant's friend, Linda Maples, were at another bar near the scene of the shooting. The defendant, her brother, and Dana Love had arrived at Loffers, the other bar, at approximately 12:30 a.m. Maples was present at Loffers when the defendant arrived. The four stayed until closing at Loffers. Defendant stated during the interrogation that she had not had anything to drink during that time, although she had smoked a joint of marijuana earlier in the evening after she had gotten off work. After Loffers closed, defendant stated that the four proceeded to a nearby bar which was still open, which has been referred to in the record variously as Tom's place or Rick's place. Upon arriving, they found the bar was crowded. As defendant went through the door, there was a lot of pushing and shoving. She described the events which followed:
....
"... I was walking on and she kinda, I guess, elbowed me again, and I turned around and I don't know what she was doing, 'cause I couldn't see her hands. You know, I couldn't see her hands. And it was dark, it was dark there. You know, and I couldn't see her hands, so I didn't know what the girl had. If she had anything. I don't know if she had a purse. I couldn't ... I know I couldn't see her hands.
....
....
....
....
At the trial, Keith D. Hill, defendant's brother, testified that he, his sister, and Dana Love left his sister's house at approximately 11:00 to 11:15 p.m., and went to Loffers. Keith Hill testified that his sister did not have anything to drink at Loffers. After Loffers closed, the three decided to go next door to Rick's place. Accompanying the three was Linda Maples, the defendant's friend, whom the three had met at Loffers.
According to Keith Hill's testimony, at Rick's place, people There were approximately 20 to 25 people pushing back and forth in the small hallway at the entrance to Rick's place. In the hallway, a woman told defendant, "Bitch, you pushed me." Defendant told the woman, "If I did, I'm sorry." The woman responded, "Bitch, that ain't it." Keith Hill testified that "[t]hey just went on" and his sister Keith Hill testified that Jackson had raised her hand like she had something in it with which she was trying to hit his sister. Keith Hill testified that he was unable to see if anything was actually in Jackson's hand because it was too dark and there were too many people in the crowded hallway. Keith Hill also testified that, prior to the shooting, Jackson had struck the defendant.
Dana L. Love also testified that there was a good deal of pushing and shoving in the hallway in Rick's place. Love testified that it was very dark in the hallway, and too crowded for the number of people who were in it. One woman in the hallway called defendant a bitch and accused defendant of pushing her. Love testified that defendant told the woman, "if I pushed into you, I'm sorry." Love testified that the defendant "was trying to apologize to the girl and evidently apologizing wasn't enough." Love testified that Jackson was angry, and told defendant, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Mayberry
...offenses must be given even if the evidence is weak and inconclusive and consists solely of the defendant's testimony. State v. Hill, 242 Kan. 68, 73, 744 P.2d 1228 (1987). The affirmative duty to instruct arises, however, only where there is evidence under which the defendant may reasonabl......
-
State v. Stewart
...any evidence to support a claim of self-defense, even if that evidence consists solely of the defendant's testimony. State v. Hill, 242 Kan. 68, 78, 744 P.2d 1228 (1987). Where self-defense is asserted, evidence of the deceased's long-term cruelty and violence towards the defendant is admis......
-
Grimes v. McAnulty
...as alternative theories. E.g., People v. Brooks, 130 Ill.App.3d 747, 86 Ill.Dec. 90, 474 N.E.2d 1287 (1985); State v. Hill, 242 Kan. 68, 744 P.2d 1228 (1987); Commonwealth v. Wilson, 433 Pa.Super. 28, 639 A.2d 1194 (1994); Merritt v. State, 85 Tex.Crim. 565, 213 S.W. 941 (1919). In State v.......
-
State v. Brown, 92,544.
...and his [or her] reason."' [Citation omitted.]" State v. Moncla, 262 Kan. 58, 74, 936 P.2d 727 (1997); see also State v. Hill, 242 Kan. 68, 74, 744 P.2d 1228 (1987) ("`Such emotional state of mind [heat of passion] must be of such a degree as would cause an ordinary man to act on impulse wi......