Girouard v. State
321 Md. 532, 583 A.2d 718 (1991)
Rule of Law:
Words alone, no matter how insulting, offensive, or abusive, are not legally adequate provocation to mitigate the crime of second-degree murder to voluntary manslaughter.
Facts:
- Steven Girouard and Joyce Girouard had been married for two months, and their relationship was tense.
- On the night of October 28, 1987, Steven overheard Joyce on the phone telling a friend she was seeking a discharge from the army because her husband did not love her.
- An argument ensued, during which Joyce followed Steven into the bedroom, stepped on his back, pulled his hair, and began a barrage of verbal insults.
- Joyce told Steven she never wanted to marry him, called him a 'lousy fuck,' said he reminded her of her father, and stated she wanted a divorce.
- Joyce then falsely told Steven she had filed abuse charges against him with his commanding officer and the Judge Advocate General's Office (JAG).
- In response, Steven retrieved a kitchen knife, concealed it behind a pillow, and returned to the bedroom.
- As Joyce continued her verbal attack, Steven lunged at her and stabbed her 19 times, causing her death.
- After the stabbing, Steven attempted suicide by slitting his wrists and then called the police, confessing he had murdered his wife.
Procedural Posture:
- Steven Girouard was tried in a court trial (bench trial) in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, the state's trial court of general jurisdiction.
- The trial court found Girouard guilty of second-degree murder.
- Girouard, as appellant, appealed the conviction to the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, the state's intermediate appellate court.
- The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment.
- The Court of Appeals of Maryland, the state's highest court, granted certiorari to review the case.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Do insulting and taunting words alone constitute legally adequate provocation to mitigate a charge of second-degree murder to manslaughter?
Opinions:
Majority - Cole, J.
No, insulting and taunting words alone do not constitute legally adequate provocation to mitigate a charge of second-degree murder to manslaughter. For provocation to be legally adequate, it must be 'calculated to inflame the passion of a reasonable man and tend to cause him to act for the moment from passion rather than reason.' The court held that the traditional rule that 'words alone are not adequate provocation' remains sound. While Joyce Girouard's conduct included minor physical contact (stepping on his back, pulling his hair), it was insufficient to cause a reasonable person of Steven's size to fear bodily harm. The court explicitly rejected a subjective standard that would consider the defendant's 'peculiar frailties of mind,' emphasizing that the standard must remain that of an objective, reasonable person. Citing overwhelming precedent from other jurisdictions and strong public policy concerns about escalating domestic disputes, the court declined to expand the recognized categories of adequate provocation to include verbal attacks.
Analysis:
This case reaffirms the traditional common law rule that mere words are insufficient provocation to reduce murder to manslaughter. The court's decision emphasizes the objective nature of the 'reasonable person' test, refusing to incorporate the defendant's individual psychological weaknesses into the analysis. This holding solidifies a high legal bar for the provocation defense, reflecting a strong public policy to avoid legally excusing lethal violence that erupts from verbal domestic arguments. By declining to expand the categories of adequate provocation, the court signals that any changes to this long-standing doctrine are unlikely without exceptionally compelling circumstances not present here.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: Girouard v. State (1991)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"