State v. Peltier

Decision Date10 February 2016
Docket NumberNo. A14–1452.,A14–1452.
Citation874 N.W.2d 792
Parties STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Amanda Lea PELTIER, Appellant.
CourtMinnesota Supreme Court

Lori Swanson, Attorney General, Michael T. Everson, Assistant Attorney General, Saint Paul, MN; and Neil Nelson, Pope County Attorney, Glenwood, MN, for respondent.

Cathryn Middlebrook, Chief Appellate Public Defender, Rochelle R. Winn, Assistant Appellate Public Defender, Saint Paul, MN, for appellant.

OPINION

DIETZEN, Justice.

Appellant Amanda Lea Peltier was found guilty by a Pope County jury of first-degree murder while committing child abuse, second-degree felony murder, and second-degree manslaughter, arising out of the death of Eric D. on February 28, 2013. The district court convicted Peltier of first-degree murder while committing child abuse and imposed a life sentence with the possibility of supervised release after 30 years. On direct appeal Peltier argues: (1) the jury instruction omitted essential elements of the charged offense, denying her a fair trial; (2) the district court abused its discretion in allowing a state expert to testify that biting a child is a "particularly vicious" form of child abuse; and (3) the prosecutor engaged in misconduct during closing argument that deprived Peltier of a fair trial. For the reasons that follow, we affirm the conviction.

On the evening of February 27, 2013, police responded to a 911 call from Peltier's home that her stepson, four-year-old Eric, was unresponsive. Upon arrival, an emergency medical technician immediately administered CPR1 and transported Eric to the local hospital. The child was intubated with a ventilator to assist his breathing, and a nasogastric tube

was inserted into his stomach to help stabilize him. Subsequently, Eric was transported by helicopter to St. Cloud Hospital, where he died after medical efforts to save his life proved unsuccessful.

Dr. Michael McGee performed an autopsy on Eric's body that revealed a series of four crescent-shaped injuries on Eric's scalp, as well as swelling of the soft tissue of the scalp. These injuries were consistent with an adult biting Eric's head 2 to 3 days prior to his death. The child's body had 11 separate bruises on the forehead, including two that could have been caused by an object striking Eric. Also, his body had a significant injury to the lips

, a hemorrhage on the left ear, and inner-ear injuries to the right ear.

Dr. McGee concluded that the cause of death was peritonitis

, which was the result of a perforated bowel. Peritonitis occurs when bacteria are released into the abdominal cavity, producing an inflammatory response. Dr. McGee concluded that the perforation of the bowel probably occurred within three days before Eric's death and was the result of blunt force trauma to Eric's abdomen.

Peltier was questioned about the events leading up to Eric's death by investigators from the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) on February 28 and March 5, 2013. She told them that on Tuesday, February 26, after leaving Eric on the couch, she heard him scream and returned to find his lip bleeding. Peltier said that Eric began vomiting around 1:30 p.m. that day, and that he continued vomiting all afternoon and into the evening. Eric also complained of pain in his stomach and back.

Peltier told the BCA investigators that Eric's illness persisted into Wednesday, February 27, and that he started taking "short, quick" breaths at about 7:30 p.m. He also had a slight fever at that time. Peltier stated that she brought Eric into her bed to keep an eye on him, that he appeared confused, and that he repeatedly tried to drink out of his "puke bucket." Peltier left Eric in the bedroom and went to prepare a place for him to sleep on the couch. When Peltier returned, Eric was on his back, choking on his own vomit. Peltier began performing CPR, and Eric's father, D.D., called 911.

Following an investigation, the matter was submitted to a grand jury. The grand jury returned an indictment charging Peltier with murder in the first degree while committing child abuse, Minn.Stat. § 609.185(a)(5) (2014), and murder in the second degree while committing malicious punishment of a child, Minn.Stat. §§ 609.19, subd. 2(1) (2014), 609.377, subd. 6 (2014).

At trial, the State presented extensive testimony in support of its theory that Peltier caused the death of her stepson, Eric, while committing child abuse. The State introduced the results of Dr. McGee's autopsy and the recordings of two interviews of Peltier by state investigators. During one of the interviews, Peltier admitted to slapping Eric on the mouth or the side of his head "a good 6 to 10 times" in the 2 days preceding his death. Additionally, the staff at the daycare that Eric attended from December 2010 through January 2012 testified that Eric appeared to be physically abused. Also, Dr. James Green, an orthopedic surgeon, testified that Eric suffered a broken arm while in Peltier's care. Finally, Peltier's neighbor, T.C., testified that, on the Saturday following Eric's death, Peltier told her that she was going to "go down for" Eric's death.

Following trial, a Pope County jury found Peltier guilty of first-degree murder while committing child abuse, second-degree murder while committing malicious punishment of a child, and the lesser-included offense of second-degree manslaughter. The district court imposed a life sentence with eligibility for supervised release after 30 years. This direct appeal followed.

I.

Peltier first argues that the district court erred when it instructed the jury on the definition of first-degree murder while committing child abuse under Minn.Stat. § 609.185(a)(5), and that the error denied her a fair trial. Specifically, Peltier contends that the jury instructions omitted essential elements of the charged offense that allowed the jury to find her guilty without finding that the State proved all the elements of the crime. The State responds that Peltier failed to raise this argument below, and therefore it is subject to plain-error review. Also, the State maintains that the district court did not err because it properly instructed the jury on all the elements of first-degree child-abuse murder.

We review a district court's jury instructions for an abuse of discretion. State v. Mahkuk, 736 N.W.2d 675, 682 (Minn.2007). The district court enjoys considerable latitude in selecting jury instructions, including the specific language of those instructions. See State v. Kelley, 855 N.W.2d 269, 274 (Minn.2014). But the jury instructions must fairly and adequately explain the law of the case and not materially misstate the law. State v. Carridine, 812 N.W.2d 130, 142 (Minn.2012) ; State v. Kuhnau, 622 N.W.2d 552, 556 (Minn.2001). For example, a district court commits plain error if it fails to properly instruct the jury on all elements of the offense charged. See State v. Vance, 734 N.W.2d 650, 658 (Minn.2007) (explaining State v. Ihle, 640 N.W.2d 910, 912–17 (Minn.2002) ); Mahkuk, 736 N.W.2d at 682. We review the jury instructions as a whole to determine whether they fairly and adequately explain the law. Kelley, 855 N.W.2d at 274.

Peltier was convicted of first-degree murder while committing child abuse. Minn.Stat. § 609.185(a)(5) ; Minn.Stat. § 609.377. A person is guilty of this type of first-degree murder if she:

causes the death of a minor while committing child abuse, when the perpetrator has engaged in a past pattern of child abuse upon a child and the death occurs under circumstances manifesting an extreme indifference to human life.

Minn.Stat. § 609.185(a)(5). Under this statute, "child abuse" is defined as "an act committed against a minor victim that constitutes a violation" of any one of twelve enumerated statutes. Minn.Stat. § 609.185(d) (2014). The district court in this case instructed the jury that "child abuse" includes first-degree assault, Minn.Stat. § 609.221 (2014) ; third-degree assault, Minn.Stat. § 609.223 (2014) ; fifth-degree assault, Minn.Stat. § 609.224 (2014) ; malicious punishment of a child, Minn.Stat. § 609.377 ; and neglect of a child, Minn.Stat. § 609.378 (2014). At issue in the present appeal are the district court's instructions to the jury with respect to malicious punishment of a child.

Malicious punishment of a child is defined, in relevant part, as "an intentional act or a series of intentional acts with respect to a child," committed by "[a] parent, legal guardian, or caretaker," that "evidences unreasonable force or cruel discipline that is excessive under the circumstances." Minn.Stat. § 609.377, subd. 1. Malicious punishment is either a gross misdemeanor or a felony, depending upon the offender's record of prior offenses, the nature and extent of any injury inflicted, and the age of the child. Id., subds. 2–6. Section 609.377, subdivision 4, provides that malicious punishment is a felony when "the punishment is to a child under the age of four and causes bodily harm to the head, eyes, neck, or otherwise causes multiple bruises to the body." Id., subd. 4.

The district court's jury instructions on the elements of first-degree murder while committing child abuse addressed malicious punishment twice.2 The court first discussed malicious punishment as part of its instruction on the "child abuse" element. It identified, and defined, each of the five forms of child abuse that were alleged by the State: first-, third-, and fifth-degree assault; malicious punishment of a child; and child neglect. With respect to malicious punishment, the court gave each of the three elements: (1) "parent, legal guardian, or caretaker"; (2) "intentional act or series of intentional acts with respect to a child"; and (3) "evidences unreasonable force or cruel discipline that is excessive under the circumstances." The court defined the terms "unreasonable force," "cruelty," and "caretaker." Finally, the court advised the jury that a person is not guilty of malicious punishment if the person has used ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
172 cases
  • State v. Khalil, A19-1281
    • United States
    • Minnesota Court of Appeals
    • July 27, 2020
    ...court abuses its discretion "if it fails to properly instruct the jury on all elements of the offense charged." State v. Peltier , 874 N.W.2d 792, 797 (Minn. 2016). A district court "may, in [its] discretion, give additional instructions in response to a jury's question on any point of law.......
  • State v. Washington-Davis
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • June 29, 2016
    ...not apply in every jury-instruction-error case that examines the substantial-rights prong of the plain-error test. See State v. Peltier, 874 N.W.2d 792, 801 (Minn.2016) (noting that Watkins did not adopt an “exclusive” test for assessing the substantial-rights prong). The overall goal in ev......
  • State v. Sanchez-Sanchez
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • May 18, 2016
    ...trial constitutes an error that is plain. A “plain” error is an error that is “clear or obvious” at the time of appeal. State v. Peltier, 874 N.W.2d 792, 799 (Minn.2016) ; State v. Kelley, 855 N.W.2d 269, 277 (Minn.2014). “An error is clear or obvious if it ‘contravenes case law, a rule, or......
  • Caldwell v. State
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • October 19, 2016
    ...of the judicial proceedings. Id. A “plain” error is an error that is “clear or obvious” at the time of appeal. State v. Peltier, 874 N.W.2d 792, 799 (Minn.2016) ; State v. Kelley, 855 N.W.2d 269, 277 (Minn.2014). “An error is clear or obvious if it ‘contravenes case law, a rule, or a standa......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT