State v. Young
| Decision Date | 07 November 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. 2011–311–C.A.,2011–311–C.A. |
| Citation | 78 A.3d 787 |
| Parties | STATE v. Donald YOUNG. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Aaron L. Weisman, Department of Attorney General, for State.
Christopher S. Gontarz, Esq., Middletown, for Defendant.
Present: SUTTELL, C.J., GOLDBERG, FLAHERTY, ROBINSON, and INDEGLIA, JJ.
The defendant, Donald Young, appeals to this Court from a judgment of conviction on seven counts; the murder of Kasean Benton in violation of G.L.1956 § 11–23–1 (count 1), conspiracy to commit murder in violation of G.L.1956 § 11–1–6 (count 2), discharging a firearm during the commission of a violent crime resulting in the death of another in violation of G.L.1956 § 11–47–3.2 (count 3), assault with a dangerous weapon on Dukuly Torell Soko in violation of G.L.1956 § 11–5–2 (count 4), conspiring with others to assault Soko with intent to murder in violation of § 11–1–6 (count 5), discharging a firearm while committing a crime of violence in violation of § 11–47–3.2 (count 6), and possession of an unlicensed firearm in violation of § 11–47–8(a) (count 7). The trial justice sentenced the defendant to consecutive life sentences plus twenty non-parolable years to run consecutively to the life sentences.
On appeal, defendant advances two arguments why this Court should vacate the convictions. First, he argues that the trial justice erred when he admitted evidence of gang affiliation, evidence relating to the earlier stabbing of Soko, allegedly by defendant, and testimony about an unsolved homicide. Second, he contends that the trial justice should have dismissed the offense of discharging a firearm while in the commission of a crime of violence because it merged with the offense of assault with a dangerous weapon with intent to murder.
After a careful review of defendant's arguments and a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgments of conviction.
During the waning daylight hours on July 12, 2009, defendant and two associates were walking on Trask Street in Providence. The group approached a white Buick that was parked next to the driveway in front of 30 Trask Street. Inside the vehicle, the owner and operator, Kasean Benton, a Providence resident, sat next to his friend, Dukuly Torell Soko. Soko was a former resident of Providence who was visiting from New York and staying with family members at 30 Trask Street. When defendant was approximately thirty feet away from the Buick, he raised his arms and fired several rounds from a black semiautomatic weapon into the vehicle's windshield; after which, witnesses testified to hearing, “Fu* * you, ni* *er,” “motherf* * * * * *,” “bit* *,” “ni* *er.” Immediately, Benton and Soko fled the vehicle; Benton ran toward the backyard at 30 Trask Street while Soko ran towards Cahill Street. They did not, however, escape unscathed. In the aftermath of the shooting rampage, one man was wounded and another was dead.
Soko reached Cahill Street and laid low until he heard emergency sirens approaching the area. He then rushed back to 30 Trask Street, his grandfather's house, in an effort to locate Benton. Soko first encountered a Providence Police Officer, but he refused to answer any questions or cooperate with the officer until he had located Benton. Soko's aunt, Tina Soko Taylor, who had heard the gunshots while inside the house and had conducted an unsuccessful neighborhood search for Soko, saw him upon her return. She asked him what had happened, and Soko responded, A neighbor, Robert Sullivan, testified that he heard a “pumped up” Soko tell his aunt, When asked to whom the word “they” referred, Sullivan testified that Soko said,
Soon after this exchange, police noticed that Soko had suffered an apparent gunshot wound. Soko was placed in a police cruiser, and then an ambulance, before being transported to Rhode Island Hospital. At the hospital, Soko named defendant as the shooter and then identified him from a six-person photographic lineup.1 It was not until after he was discharged from the hospital that Soko learned Benton had been killed.
Shortly after the police arrived on the scene, responding officers found Benton's white sneaker, still tied and with blood on it, at the base of a stockade fence at the rear end of the driveway at 30 Trask Street. After the owner of the house opened the locked gate, police found Benton's body between the fence and a backyard swimming pool. The state's medical examiner testified that Benton had died due to a gunshot wound that entered the left side of his back, passed between his ninth and tenth ribs, struck his left lung and his heart, and then exited his body on the left side of his chest between his second and third ribs.
The state developed at trial that the shooting on July 12 was the final act of an ongoing feud between two groups of young men, YNIC 2 and Comstock. 3 Even though Benton and Soko had been friends with defendant when they were growing up, their respective relationships with him had soured. Soko testified that he had met defendant in Head Start and had played basketball with him twice when he was sixteen. However, in 2007, Soko had a physical altercation with defendant at a party, after which Soko was hospitalized for stab wounds. The next day, after he was released from the hospital, Soko had a second physical altercation with defendant on the street after Soko accused defendant of stabbing him at the party, resulting in Soko punching defendant. Further, even before the incident at the party, Soko and defendant had exchanged “angry” or “threatening” words at the Providence Place Mall.
Soko also testified that Benton and defendant had become enemies because Benton was a member of YNIC and defendant was a member of Comstock. Because Benton and defendant were members of their respective and rival gangs, their formerly friendly relationship came to an end. Soko also testified that in 2007, another member of Comstock, Darren Regans, had been murdered in a Providence nightclub. Although he never was charged with any crime arising from that homicide, Benton had been questioned in connection with Regans's death.
The defendant stood for trial before a jury in April 2011 for seven criminal offenses.The state's theory was that defendant murdered Benton in retaliation for the killing of Darren Regans in 2007 and that defendant tried to kill Soko because of his association with YNIC. The jury found defendant guilty on all counts. In June 2011, the trial justice sentenced defendant to a lengthy period of incarceration. The total sentence imposed on the various counts of conviction amounted to consecutive life sentences plus forty years, with at least sixty years to serve.4
The defendant predicates his appeal on two grounds. First, defendant asserts that the trial justice erred in allowing testimony about gang affiliation, physical altercations between defendant and Soko, and the unsolved murder of Darren Regans. Second, defendant argues that the trial justice erred when he denied his motion for judgment of acquittal, pursuant to Rule 29 of the Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure, because defendant claimed he was twice placed in jeopardy in that counts 4 and 6 should have merged.
Before the trial began, defendant filed several motions in limine in an effort to exclude certain testimony under Rules 403 and 404(b) of the Rhode Island Rules of Evidence.5 First, defendant moved to exclude any testimony relating to either gang affiliation or retaliation between YNIC and Comstock because such testimony was without probative value and was unduly prejudicial. In response, the trial justice ruled that he would admit “some” discussion of gang affiliation and the contention that YNIC and Comstock were at odds for the purposes of voir dire during jury selection. He also ruled that he would delay ruling on the motion and would hear further arguments from counsel after jury selection.
Next, defendant moved for an order restricting Soko from testifying about the stabbing he suffered at the 2007 party, and his subsequent physical altercation with defendant, because Soko could not swear that defendant stabbed him. Soko could only testify that, based on defendant's presence when the stabbing took place, he assumed defendant had stabbed him. The trial justice delayed ruling on that motion until trial, when the parties could make their respective arguments as to the relevance of the testimony. The trial justice also deferred ruling on a final motion in limine, which was defendant's motion to exclude any testimony about the unsolved homicide of Darren Regans.6
We review a trial justice's admission of evidence for an abuse of discretion. See State v. Evans, 742 A.2d 715, 719 (R.I.1999) (). “The trial justice's decision will be upheld unless the trial justice abused his or her discretion and the admission of irrelevant evidence was prejudicial to a defendant's rights.” Id. (citing State v. Gabriau, 696 A.2d 290, 294 (R.I.1997)). “The trial justice will not have abused his or her discretion as long as some grounds supporting his or her decision appear in the record.” Id.
Before we consider the merits of defendant's appeal, we must first address whether the issues are properly before us. We consistently have held that we will review only those issues that have been properly preserved for appellate review. State v. Harris, 871 A.2d 341, 345 (R.I.2005) (citing State v. Saluter, 715 A.2d 1250, 1258 (R.I.1998)); see also State v. Long, 488 A.2d 427, 432 (R.I.1985).
Rule 103(a)(1) of the Rhode Island Rules of Evidence provides that an erroneous...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Brown
...This Court reviews a trial justice's decisions on the admission of evidence by employing an abuse-of-discretion standard. State v. Young, 78 A.3d 787, 792 (R.I.2013) (citing State v. Evans, 742 A.2d 715, 719 (R.I.1999)). We will uphold the trial justice's decision “unless the trial justice ......
-
State v. Andrade
...that, had this issue been preserved, the photographs of defendant were probative evidence of motive for the murder. See State v. Young , 78 A.3d 787, 793 n.7 (R.I. 2013).6 The defendant also argues—for the first time on appeal—that the trial justice erred by admitting the photographs becaus......
-
State v. Garlington
...of a rival gang, Comstock. Benton himself was shot and killed on July 12, 2009 by a member of Comstock, Donald Young. See State v. Young, 78 A.3d 787, 790 (R.I. 2013). The facts set forth in the Supreme Court opinion in the Young case give some context to the issues before the Court in this......
-
Young v. Wall
...No. P1/2009 - 3676AG. The judgments of conviction were affirmed by the Rhode Island Supreme Court on November 7, 2013. See State v. Young, 78 A.3d 787 (R.I. 2013). Mr. Young filed his petition within the one-year durational limitation prescribed by 28 U.S.C. §2244(d)(1).Background Mr. Young......