State v. Robinson
261 Kan. 865, 934 P.2d 38 (1997)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A depraved heart second-degree murder statute, which requires a reckless killing under circumstances manifesting 'extreme indifference to the value of human life,' is not unconstitutionally vague. This language describes a higher degree of culpability than the ordinary recklessness required for involuntary manslaughter, and it is a factual question for the jury to determine if the defendant's conduct rose to this level.
Facts:
- Richard Crowley, believing his sons had been threatened by Jeremy Hendrickson and his friends, went to a park to confront them.
- Crowley approached a group of four boys, including 14-year-old Jerry Lee Robinson, spit in Hendrickson's face, and punched another boy, Tony Surber, twice.
- After Surber obtained a knife from Robinson, Crowley retrieved a metal baseball bat from his truck and began chasing the boys.
- The four boys each grabbed a golf club from a parked car and began 'fencing' with Crowley, surrounding him.
- Crowley ran towards a passing car for help, but the boys chased him down and prevented him from reaching it.
- The altercation continued, and Crowley struck Surber twice with the baseball bat after Surber had tripped and fallen.
- As Crowley stood over the fallen Surber, Robinson ran up and struck Crowley in the head with a golf club.
- The blow from the golf club was fatal, and the club became embedded in Crowley's head.
Procedural Posture:
- The State of Kansas charged Jerry Lee Robinson with depraved heart second-degree murder in the trial court.
- A jury convicted Robinson of depraved heart second-degree murder.
- The trial court granted Robinson's motion for a downward sentencing departure and sentenced him to a term of 55 months.
- Robinson, the appellant, filed a notice of appeal from his conviction to the Kansas Court of Appeals.
- The case was transferred to the Supreme Court of Kansas for a direct appeal.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the Kansas depraved heart second-degree murder statute, which punishes a reckless killing done 'under circumstances showing extreme indifference to the value of human life,' violate due process by being unconstitutionally vague when compared to the reckless involuntary manslaughter statute?
Opinions:
Majority - Abbott, J.
No, the depraved heart second-degree murder statute does not violate due process. The statute is distinguishable from reckless involuntary manslaughter because it requires a higher degree of culpability. While both crimes require recklessness, depraved heart murder requires the additional element that the killing occur 'under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.' This phrase describes a kind of recklessness that differs in degree, but not in kind, from ordinary recklessness. The legislature intended to create this middle category for 'extremely reckless' conduct, and it is the jury's role to determine whether the defendant's conduct rose to this more culpable level. The phrase itself is not so vague that it requires a specific definition for the jury, as it communicates the expected task in ordinary language.
Concurring in part and dissenting in part - Lockett, J.
This opinion concurs with the majority's result but dissents from its reasoning regarding the admissibility of Robinson's confession. The dissent argues that the police did not 'scrupulously honor' the 14-year-old defendant's invoked right to silence, as required by Michigan v. Mosley, when they re-interrogated him just one hour after his mother had asserted his right. However, the dissent agrees the conviction should be affirmed because admitting the confession was harmless error. The evidence of guilt was so direct and overwhelming that the erroneously admitted confession could not have affected the trial's outcome.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the constitutionality of Kansas's depraved heart murder statute, affirming that it is not void for vagueness. The court's analysis establishes that the key distinction from involuntary manslaughter lies in the degree of recklessness, which is a factual determination left to the jury. This empowers juries to differentiate between ordinary recklessness and the 'extreme indifference' that warrants a more severe murder conviction, without requiring trial courts to provide a specific definition of that phrase. The ruling provides clarity for prosecutors in charging decisions involving extremely reckless acts that result in death.
Unlock the full brief for State v. Robinson