State v. Lamontagne
| Decision Date | 30 June 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 2018-241-C.A,16-941A,P1,2018-241-C.A |
| Parties | STATE v. Joseph LAMONTAGNE. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
The defendant, Joseph Lamontagne, was convicted by a jury of one count of first-degree robbery, in violation of G.L. 1956 § 11-39-1(a), and one count of assault with a dangerous weapon in a dwelling with intent to rob, in violation of G.L. 1956 § 11-5-4. He was sentenced to two concurrent terms of thirty-five years at the Adult Correctional Institutions, with twenty-three years to serve and the balance suspended, with probation.
On appeal, Lamontagne contends that the trial justice committed two errors, each of which, he maintains, entitles him to have his convictions vacated and be granted a new trial. First, defendant avers that the trial justice erred in excluding evidence of the complaining witness's prior convictions. Second, he argues that the trial justice erred in excluding photographic evidence depicting injuries defendant allegedly suffered during the underlying incident.
For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we affirm the judgment of the Superior Court.
The scene of the robbery and assault at issue in this case is an apartment building often referred to as the "mansion," an appellation evocative of its former grandeur. Built in 1840 by prominent Woonsocket businessman James Arnold, it has since, in the trial justice's words, "been chopped up into small rental units, some occupied by the underbelly of society." It is perhaps a fitting metaphor for this case. The defendant is an honorably-discharged veteran of the Vietnam War, in which he served on a helicopter rescuing wounded
soldiers from the battlefield. After returning home, he attended college, raised a family, and was a well-respected member of his community. Unfortunately, he suffered from anxiety and depression as a result of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Indeed, he was on a break from a PTSD program when he had occasion to visit the "mansion" and the events underlying the indictment transpired.
The charges against defendant turned in large measure upon the credibility of the complaining witness, Cheryl Cacciato. Cacciato lived in a small, L-shaped apartment at the "mansion" with Donna Vanmoerkerque, their beds separated by a sheet affording them a modicum of privacy in the small apartment. Cacciato's boyfriend, Kevin Miller, was also a frequent overnight resident.
Vanmoerkerque testified that, on December 27, 2015, she visited a friend who lived in an apartment located down the hall from her own. She testified that defendant and her friend's husband, Don, were also in the apartment. She further testified that defendant asked Don where he could get some crack cocaine. According to Vanmoerkerque, Don replied that her (Vanmoerkerque's) friend sold it, at which point defendant and Vanmoerkerque left and walked to the latter's apartment.
Vanmoerkerque continued her testimony, stating that when she and defendant arrived at her apartment, they sat down at the kitchen table. Cacciato was also present, sitting on her bed behind the sheet. A short while later, Vanmoerkerque testified, Miller entered the apartment and said to Cacciato, Shortly thereafter, Miller left the apartment. On cross-examination, Vanmoerkerque admitted that she had not actually seen Miller give any money to Cacciato. According to Vanmoerkerque, after another fifteen to twenty minutes, she asked defendant, "What do you want?" She testified that defendant replied, "I want a hundred dollar piece." Cacciato offered that she had the requisite inventory, and Vanmoerkerque announced, "I'm going to walk the dogs."
It was further Vanmoerkerque's testimony that she left the apartment for approximately seven or eight minutes and that, as she returned, she "heard this loud smack come from within [her] apartment[.]" She ran into the apartment, saw that the kitchen table had been overturned, and observed defendant "sitting on top of [Cacciato] smashing her head with a stone" the size of a "very big boulder[.]" She said she picked up defendant and threw him off Cacciato. She testified that Cacciato appeared to be unconscious and her face was covered in blood. She asked defendant, "Why are you doing this?" He replied, "She tried to rob me."
Vanmoerkerque testified that defendant tried to get back at Cacciato three times, but Vanmoerkerque was able to fend him off. She told defendant that she was calling the police, whereupon defendant said, Vanmoerkerque stayed with defendant after he left the apartment and until the police arrived and arrested him.
Cheryl Cacciato offered a somewhat different version of the salient events that occurred at the "mansion" on December 27, 2015. Cacciato acknowledged under oath that she supplemented her fixed disability income by selling drugs and that she was an addict herself. She testified that on the evening in question she, Miller, and Vanmoerkerque were in her apartment when defendant knocked at the door. He entered and sat at the kitchen table with Vanmoerkerque; Cacciato was sitting on her bed watching television, and Miller was talking with her. She testified that she handed Miller $20 from money she had set aside for rent. She also testified that she counted the remaining $325, folded it in half twice, secured it with a rubber band, and placed it in the front left pocket of her shirt. Miller then left, as did Vanmoerkerque shortly thereafter to walk the dogs, leaving defendant and Cacciato alone in the apartment.
In her testimony, Cacciato denied ever discussing a drug deal with defendant that evening. Rather, she testified that defendant stood up from the table, walked toward the entrance to the apartment, and then she was hit in the head twice with a hard object that appeared to be an "asphalt chunk of rock." She began to bleed. After the second hit, she continued, she fell off the bed onto the ground, at which point defendant stood over her, reached down, and took the money out of her shirt pocket, saying, Cacciato testified that defendant hit her several more times with the rock, proclaiming, She said she tried to scream for help but "had laryngitis
[and] couldn't scream[.]" She also tried to grab a switchblade knife that she kept "open and wedged in the hinge of [her] closet door."
Cacciato also testified that she struggled to stand, but kept slipping because of the blood on the floor: "I just couldn't get any traction." Using the bed frame, she pulled herself toward the door of the apartment; all the while, defendant kept going after her. She testified that she tried to throw a chair at him and tipped the kitchen table over. She further testified that defendant straddled her, sat on top of her, and he grabbed her "by the throat with his left hand, and with the right" tried to hit her with the rock, saying,
At this juncture, according to Cacciato, Vanmoerkerque reentered the apartment. Contrary to the latter's testimony, Cacciato testified that at that point defendant did not hit her anymore. Rather, he stood up and told Vanmoerkerque to retrieve the rock that Cacciato had previously knocked out of his hand. She testified that he then left the apartment and Vanmoerkerque followed him.
Officer Jeffrey Gagnon testified at trial that he was a member of the Woonsocket Police Department on the day of the incident and he arrived on the scene and proceeded inside the apartment. He observed Cacciato "bleeding from the head" with a large kitchen knife in her hand. He also observed a rock "slightly larger than a softball" in the kitchen sink. Officer Daniel Lajoie also responded to the incident. He described "blood covering the floor" of the apartment and Cacciato's hair as "saturated" in blood. He testified that, as he was transporting defendant from the scene to the police station in the police car, defendant said:
Detective Gabriel Koneczny1 testified that he also responded to the "mansion" that evening and that defendant gave him $325 that he had in his pocket at the scene. The money consisted of sixteen $20 bills and five $1 bills.
Lamontagne presented one witness, Jamie Silva, his daughter. She testified that she had given defendant $350 on the afternoon of the incident because he needed money "for food and whatever he needed."
As Cheryl Cacciato was the only percipient witness to the alleged assault and robbery, her credibility was critical to the prosecution. In an effort to prevent defendant from eroding her credibility by the admission of four of her prior criminal convictions, the state filed, before the commencement of trial, a motion in limine seeking to exclude evidence of her convictions for (1) domestic disorderly conduct in 2012, which was disposed of in 2013, (2) resisting arrest in 2012, which was disposed of in 2013, (3) violation of a no-contact order in 2012, and (4) driving under the influence in 2009. At a hearing on April 17, 2017, the trial justice excluded the convictions for the violation of a no-contact order in 2012 and driving under the influence in 2009. The defendant indicated that he wished to use the remaining two convictions to impeach Cacciato's credibility under Rule 609 of the Rhode Island Rules of Evidence and to show "a violent propensity on the part of this complaining witness" to support his claim of self-defense. The trial justice ruled that these two convictions might be introduced for Rule 609 purposes.
The trial justice revisited her ruling, however, on the second day of trial—after both Cacciato and Vanmoerkerque had testified but before...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Andrews v. Lombardi
-
State v. Kenner
...that "a premature notice of appeal will be considered timely so long as a final judgment is entered thereafter." State v. Lamontagne , 231 A.3d 1132, 1138 n.2 (R.I. 2020) (quoting State v. Souto , 210 A.3d 409, 415 n.8 (R.I. 2019) ). Therefore, defendant's appeal of the 2021 judgment in the......