State v. Mitchell
| Decision Date | 04 August 2021 |
| Docket Number | #29194 |
| Citation | 963 N.W.2d 326 |
| Parties | STATE of South Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Jameson Charles MITCHELL, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
JASON R. RAVNSBORG, Attorney General, ERIN E. HANDKE, Assistant Attorney General, Pierre, South Dakota, Attorneys for plaintiff and appellee.
KEVIN J. LOFTUS of Kennedy, Pier, Loftus & Reynolds, LLP, Yankton, South Dakota, Attorneys for defendant and appellant.
[¶1.] After a brief confrontation with Lucas Smith at a local bar, Jameson Mitchell armed himself with a handgun and encountered Smith in a nearby alley. Smith ran toward Mitchell, shouting for Mitchell to shoot him. After taking a few steps back, Mitchell fired at the charging Smith, fatally wounding him. Pursuant to a plea agreement with the State, Mitchell pled guilty to first-degree manslaughter under the theory that he was "resisting an attempt by the person killed to commit a crime." The circuit court imposed a 124-year prison sentence. We vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.
[¶2.] Jameson Mitchell (Mitchell) approached Lucas Smith (Smith) and Smith's friend, Jamie White (White), in the game room at Mojo's bar in Yankton shortly after midnight on April 6, 2019. Mitchell had consumed six, 16-ounce beers earlier in the evening and allegedly confronted the couple because he believed Smith had been making negative comments about him to others.
[¶3.] Video surveillance from Mojo's shows Mitchell approaching Smith and White, who were sitting near a pool table. Both Smith and White stood up and a brief physical skirmish ensued, though it is difficult to determine which party acted first. A bystander attempted to intervene before White grabbed Mitchell by the hair and pulled him around the game room. Bar employees responded by removing all three individuals, escorting Mitchell to one door and Smith and White to another.
[¶4.] Although not revealed by the surveillance video, tensions apparently flared again outside of Mojo's, prompting bar employees to order Mitchell, Smith, and White to leave the property entirely or face a response from law enforcement. White followed Smith to a friend's unlocked car parked in a nearby parking lot. White later related that Smith was extremely distraught and expressed suicidal thoughts while the two were in the car. In her testimony before the grand jury, White stated that once inside the car, Smith "started screaming and punching and yelling that he just wanted to die and that he didn't want to be here anymore ...." They got out of the car a short while later because Smith indicated he "needed to breathe[,]" and they saw Mitchell in the alley.
[¶5.] After his involuntary departure from Mojo's bar, Mitchell went back to his apartment where he retrieved a .38 caliber revolver. He later claimed the revolver was for protection, and said he was on his way to go out to eat with friends at a local restaurant. However, he first went to the alley near Mojo's where he again encountered Smith.
[¶6.] Surveillance video from a nearby auto body shop showed a portion of the confrontation between the two young men from two separate camera angles. At approximately 12:45 a.m., the recorded video footage shows Mitchell entering the alley from the right moving to the left. Initially, Mitchell is seen jogging and skipping while holding his gun. Mitchell soon slows his gait but continues advancing and points the gun directly in front of him.
[¶7.] Moments later, Smith bursts into the left side of the camera's view, running full speed at Mitchell. A subsequent investigation revealed that Smith yelled, "shoot me" as he was running toward Mitchell. Mitchell is seen taking a few steps back with his gun pointed at Smith. With Smith very near and closing fast, Mitchell fires three shots in rapid succession. After the first two shots, Smith is seen veering off to the right and running outside of the camera's view while Mitchell leaves in a different direction. The entire sequence of events transpired in less than 20 seconds.
[¶8.] The body shop surveillance video also shows Smith staggering back into the camera's view from the right before falling to the ground where White comes to attend to him. White immediately called for help, and law enforcement officers and emergency medical personnel arrived a short time later. Smith was transported to a local hospital where he died from a single gunshot wound to the chest later that morning, on his 24th birthday.1
[¶9.] Law enforcement officers quickly located Mitchell and arrested him. A Yankton County grand jury returned an indictment charging Mitchell with first-degree murder, alleging he killed Smith "with a premeditated design to effect [his] death." See SDCL 22-16-4(1). Mitchell pled not guilty, and in a May 2019 submission to the circuit court, defense counsel indicated the possibility of a self-defense claim based, in part, upon the "history between [Mitchell] and [Smith]."2
[¶10.] The relationship between the two men was, in fact, long-standing and complicated. Mitchell and Smith had known each other since elementary school. Mitchell reported several specific instances in which the older Smith bullied him, sometimes using physical violence. As adults, Mitchell had briefly lived with Smith and White, who were romantically involved at various times for several years. However, it appears the temporary living arrangement was more a consequence of White's relationship with Mitchell's girlfriend at the time, not a separate friendship with Mitchell.
[¶11.] The parties engaged in plea negotiations and reached a plea agreement under which the State agreed to dismiss the indictment alleging first-degree murder, and Mitchell agreed to plead guilty to an information charging him with first-degree manslaughter. The parties selected the statutory theory of criminal liability set out in SDCL 22-16-15(4) which describes manslaughter in the first degree as "[h]omicide ... perpetrated ... [u]nnecessarily, either while resisting an attempt by the person killed to commit a crime or after such attempt has failed." (Emphasis added). The plea agreement provided that the State would recommend a maximum prison sentence of 60 years, but further stated that "[t]he victim's family will be free to make any recommendation they wish and the defense will have an open recommendation."
[¶12.] At the change of plea hearing, the circuit court asked about the reasons for the plea agreement, and the prosecutor and Mitchell's counsel both indicated that the contingencies of proof made the agreement reasonable. Citing the body shop surveillance video footage, the prosecutor explained:
[¶13.] Defense counsel expressed a similar view and also specifically referenced the surveillance footage:
Your Honor, I would just reiterate what the State said. There are—there is a video of the shooting ... that shows that—we believe our client had a self-defense argument, and that's why we think that this plea agreement is reasonable. I agree that the State had a lot of risk potentially that the self-defense argument is successful .... So we believe the plea agreement is reasonable and fair to all parties.
[¶14.] The parties stipulated to the factual basis for the plea, which the prosecutor narrated into the record:
On or about the 6th day of April, 2019, in Yankton County, South Dakota, Jameson Mitchell, Lucas Smith, and a third party were in a physical altercation at Mojo's bar in downtown Yankton. Jameson Mitchell, Lucas Smith, and the third party were removed from the bar by employees where the altercation continued in a verbal manner in the street. The altercation proceeded to an alley in downtown Yankton. In that alley, Lucas Smith ran at Jameson Mitchell and yelled at ... Mitchell ... to shoot him. Jameson Mitchell retreated until Lucas Smith was about to overtake him. At that point, Jameson Mitchell fired 3 shots from a .38 caliber handgun. One of the shots hit Lucas Smith and he later died.
(Emphasis added).
[¶15.] The plea agreement was not binding upon the circuit court, and the court expressly advised Mitchell at the change of plea hearing that it retained the discretion to impose a life sentence.3 Smith's parents made sworn statements at the change of plea hearing, expressing their view that, notwithstanding the plea agreement, the case was more properly viewed as a murder for which Mitchell should receive a life sentence. The court accepted the plea, set a sentencing date, and ordered a presentence investigation (PSI).
[¶16.] Even on our "cold" record, the emotionally-charged setting during the sentencing hearing is unmistakable. Smith's mother and father testified and again asked the circuit court to impose a life sentence. Letters submitted by Smith's family and friends, including White, expressed a similar "life for a life" theme and asked the court to impose the maximum penalty.
[¶17.] Mitchell's mother also testified, detailing Mitchell's normal upbringing, graduation from high school, interest in athletics, involvement with coaching youth sports teams, and strong work ethic. The court received many other letters describing positive aspects of Mitchell's character.
[¶18.] In her sentencing recommendation to the circuit court, the PSI author...
To continue reading
Request your trial