State v. Mekler

• Decision Date: 14 July 2008
• Docket Number: No. 26521.,26521.
• Citation: State v. Mekler, 664 S.E.2d 477, 379 S.C. 12 (S.C. 2008)
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: The STATE, Petitioner, v. Jacqueline MEKLER, Respondent.

664 S.E.2d 477

379 S.C. 12

The STATE, Petitioner, v.Jacqueline MEKLER, Respondent.

No. 26521.

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

Heard May 8, 2008.

Decided July 14, 2008.

Attorney General Henry Dargan McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, Assistant Attorney General Melody J. Brown, all of Columbia, and David Michael Pascoe, Jr., of Orangeburg, for Petitioners.

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender for Capital Appeals Robert M. Dudek, of South Carolina Commission on Indigent Defense, Division

of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Respondents.

Justice PLEICONES.

A jury convicted Jacqueline Mekler(Mekler) of murder, and she received a sentence of thirty years.The Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for a new trial.State v. Mekler,368 S.C. 1, 626 S.E.2d 890(Ct.App.2005).We granted the State's petition for certiorari and now affirm.

FACTS

Mekler and her neighbor, Robette Spires(Spires), were visiting on Mekler's front porch one evening when Spires' husband, Bubba, (Victim) drove his truck into Mekler's yard.Victim began screaming and yelling at Spires because Spires was not at home and because Spires had not called him.Mekler and Victim began yelling at each other, and Mekler asked Victim to leave.Victim left in his truck and drove to Spires' residence, which was one block away from Mekler's home.¹

A few minutes later, Victim walked back to Mekler's house.According to Mekler, Victim approached the porch, yelling and screaming in the same manner as before he left.Mekler's dog was attached to a chain on the porch and began barking at Victim.The chained dog then ran out on the porch steps towards Victim, halting his progress.Mekler grabbed the dog and noticed a knife in Victim's hand.Victim told Mekler the knife was for the dog.After subduing the dog, Mekler stepped inside her house and grabbed her shotgun, which she had placed near the front door after Victim initially left.

Mekler testified that after she stepped on the porch with the shotgun, she continued to ask Victim to leave, but he continued to stand in the yard near the steps with the knife and threatened to come up on the porch and get Spires.Mekler testified that she pulled the hammer back on the shotgun and positioned the gun at her hip to do so.Mekler recounted that when she cocked the gun, the Victim leaned and the gun fired, but she did not remember pulling the trigger.In three separate statements to various law enforcement personnel and throughout her trial testimony, Mekler maintained that she did not intentionally pull the trigger.

At trial, defense counsel requested a jury charge on self-defense, accident, and involuntary manslaughter.The trial court refused to charge the jury on involuntary manslaughter and accident.The jury convicted Mekler of murder, and the judge sentenced her to thirty years imprisonment.The Court of Appeals reversed on the grounds that: (1)the trial court failed to charge involuntary manslaughter; and (2)the trial court failed to admit specific details of a prior act of violence by Victim.

ISSUES

I.Did the Court of Appeals err in reversing Mekler's conviction due to the failure to charge the jury on involuntary manslaughter?

II.Did the Court of Appeals err in reversing Mekler's conviction based on the trial judge's denial of Mekler's request to introduce specific details of a prior domestic violence incident between Spires and Victim?

ANALYSIS

I.Involuntary manslaughter charge

The State argues the Court of Appeals erred in reversing respondent's conviction based on the trial judge's failure to charge the jury on involuntary manslaughter.We disagree.

Involuntary manslaughter is defined as (1) the unintentional killing of another without malice but while engaged in an unlawful activity not naturally tending to cause death or great bodily harm; or (2) the unintentional killing of another without malice but while engaged in a lawful activity with reckless disregard for the safety of others.State v. Burriss,334 S.C. 256, 264-265, 513 S.E.2d 104, 109(1999).The negligent handling of a loaded gun will support a charge of involuntary manslaughter.Id.(citingState v. White,253 S.C. 475, 171 S.E.2d 712(1969)).A trial court should refuse to charge the lesser-included offense of involuntary manslaughter only where there is no evidence the defendant committed the lesser offense.State v. Crosby,355 S.C. 47, 51, 584 S.E.2d 110, 112(2003).

We hold that the Court of Appeals correctly held that there was evidence to support a finding that Mekler was lawfully armed in self-defense and did not intentionally discharge the shotgun.Moreover, evidence exists to support a jury finding that Mekler's recklessness caused the gun to fire.

The following evidence adduced at trial supports the involuntary manslaughter charge: (1) the three statements given by Mekler and introduced at trial in which Mekler stated she did not remember pulling the trigger or the shotgun discharging; (2) Mekler's trial testimony in which she stated she did not remember pulling the trigger and had to be told by Spires that she shot Victim; (3) Mekler's trial testimony in which she stated the gun was positioned at her hip so she could cock the hammer back and that her finger must have slipped on the trigger,...