United States v. Yazzie
1999 Colo. J. C.A.R. 5058, 188 F.3d 1178, 52 Fed. R. Serv. 1004 (1999)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A defendant is entitled to a jury instruction on a lesser included offense if there is evidence in the record from which a jury could rationally convict the defendant of the lesser offense and acquit on the greater offense.
Facts:
- Raymond Jones, president of a Navajo motorcycle club, received a call that a large man with tattoos named Thomas Briggs (also known as Eagle) was looking for him.
- Jones, accompanied by Alfred Yazzie and others, drove to a Seven-to-Eleven parking lot to meet Briggs.
- Witnesses for the defense testified they had been told Briggs was armed with a gun and a knife.
- Upon meeting, Briggs, who was six feet five inches and 280 pounds, allegedly uttered a threat and lunged aggressively towards Yazzie while reaching behind his back.
- Believing Briggs was reaching for a weapon, Jones struck him with a baseball bat and Yazzie kicked him and stabbed him with a pocketknife.
- Briggs died from massive head injuries produced by a blunt instrument.
- Defendants testified they acted out of fear and in self-defense, believing they were in danger.
Procedural Posture:
- A grand jury indicted Raymond Jones and Alfred Yazzie for second-degree murder and aiding and abetting in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico.
- The defendants were tried jointly before a jury.
- During the trial, the defense requested a jury instruction on the lesser included offense of involuntary manslaughter.
- The trial judge refused to give the requested instruction, instead instructing the jury only on second-degree murder and voluntary manslaughter.
- The jury convicted both Jones and Yazzie.
- Jones and Yazzie (appellants) appealed their convictions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, arguing the trial court erred.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a defendant entitled to a jury instruction on the lesser included offense of involuntary manslaughter when evidence is presented that the killing occurred during a lawful act, such as self-defense, but was performed in an unlawful manner, such as with excessive force?
Opinions:
Majority - Porfilio, Circuit Judge
Yes, a defendant is entitled to an instruction on involuntary manslaughter when there is evidence that their actions constituted a criminally negligent exercise of a lawful act, such as self-defense. The jury could have found the defendants caused Briggs' death while defending themselves, a lawful act, but did so in an unlawful manner by using excessive force. The record contained evidence—including the ambiguous flashing headlights, Briggs' alleged threat and aggressive movement, and the defendants' belief that Briggs was armed—that could support a finding that they acted in self-defense, but did so with criminal negligence. By refusing the instruction, the trial court usurped the jury's role as fact-finder, which is to weigh conflicting evidence and consider alternative theories of culpability supported by the evidence.
Analysis:
This case reinforces the critical role of the jury in weighing all evidence, even if contradicted. It establishes that a defendant's testimony, if credited, can be sufficient to warrant a lesser included offense instruction, particularly in self-defense cases. The ruling clarifies that a jury must be given the option to find a defendant guilty of involuntary manslaughter if there is any evidence supporting a theory of imperfect self-defense—that is, a lawful act (self-defense) committed in a criminally negligent or unlawful manner (excessive force). This precedent obligates trial courts to provide a full range of instructions that align with any plausible theory of defense supported by the evidence, thereby preventing an all-or-nothing choice for the jury between a serious felony and acquittal.
