« The Christmas Sweater | Main | Posner's Postings »
December 26, 2004
Reversible Error?
Lincoln's first big murder trial in a long time came to an end last week with the jury finding Lucky Iromuanya guilty of second-degree murder in the shooting death of Jenna Cooper last summer. Immediately after the trial, almost every lawyer I talked to said something along these lines:"It's too bad they're going to have to do it all over again."
Why? The prosecutor's decision to put Ms. Cooper's mother on the stand on the first day of the trial to give completely irrelevant character testimony. Testimony the judge allowed over the objection of defense counsel.
The issue in itself was simple although the determination would be more difficult.
Did Lucky Iromuanya intend to kill a popular Nebraska soccer player and injure another at a college party in April?
"It's not a whodunit, is it?" his attorney, Korey Reiman, told potential jurors. He said Iromuanya's intent will be a key issue.
The facts are pretty sad; essentially an argument over who stole some shot glasses at a party.
Cooper was excited about the party she was throwing, calling a former teammate repeatedly to ask when she was showing up.
Cooper had anchored an NU defense that helped the Huskers make their eighth straight NCAA tournament in 2003. For hours, some of the team hung out. Eventually the party grew to include men who practice with them, tutors and friends of friends.
Iromuanya was invited by a woman he'd been dating. At the party, he knew only the woman and a friend who came along.
Iromuanya and the friend were leaving just before 2 a.m. when someone at the party learned that some shot glasses had been taken.
Some people went around trying to find the glasses and the thief. That's when Jenkins confronted Iromuanya.
Attorneys for both sides said the men scuffled and separated. Cooper went to Iromuanya, who was angry that he'd been hassled and touched. She told him: "I'm touching you. It's fine."
The real culprit of the shot-glass theft was found. Jenkins approached Iromuanya again, the attorneys said.
Jenkins' intent, prosecutor Jeff Mathers said, was to apologize. But Iromuanya was mad and fired his gun.
But attorney Korey Reiman's version differed. He said in his opening statement that Jenkins got inches from Iromuanya's face. Iromuanya was scared and fired his gun to scare others away, Reiman said.
The pertinent statutes are § 28-304 which says "A person commits murder in the second degree if he causes the death of a person intentionally, but without premeditation," and § 28-305 - " A person commits manslaughter if he kills another without malice, either upon a sudden quarrel, or causes the death of another unintentionally while in the commission of an unlawful act."
From my place on the sidelines, judging from the facts, it would appear to be manslaughter considering:
In order to support a conviction of second degree murder, the
defendant must intend to kill; the prosecution must prove, beyond a
reasonable doubt, that the defendant caused the victim's death
intentionally. State v. Franklin, 241 Neb. 579, 489 N.W.2d 552 (1992).The essential elements of second degree murder are that the
murder must be done purposely and maliciously. State v. Dean,
237 Neb. 65, 464 N.W.2d 782 (1991).
I admit a bit of rooting interest in the defense in this case since I went to high school with the lead defense counsel but still intent to kill would be a big roadblock to me in reaching a murder two verdict in this case. From the facts, the bullet grazed the scalp of the person Lucky was quarrelling with so it would appear to me that he was not aiming the weapon at that person and did not intend to kill him. The bullet then hit Jenna Cooper and Iromuanya clearly did not intend to kill Cooper.
Of course, the intent issue has nothing to do with Ellen Cooper's testimony. Will the Nebraska Court of Appeals decide that it was harmless error, that the jury would have reached the same verdict even without the prejudicial testimony? Or will they give Judge Colborn a scolding and tell him to do it again?
Personally, I think there was a bigger, racial issue at the root of the verdict. Jenna Cooper was a cute, white, All-American soccer player. Lucky Iromuanya is a young black man with corn rows who was known to carry a gun. Right after the incident, a local neo-nazi group began flyering Lincoln neigborhoods with racist literature. The flyers were widely covered in the Journal-Star and the topic was addressed in the editorial pages several times. The ugly issue was there, all right. No one will ever know if that affected the jury.
Posted by Half-Cocked at December 26, 2004 10:14 PM
Comments
Steve,
I wasn't aware of this mistake. I'm sure a certain evidence professor we all know would have been beside himself about that mistake.
-I agree that there is a huge question as to whether he intended to kill anyone, and that there seems to be a lot of disturbing racial undertones to this case. However, as long as he intended to kill Jenkins, I'm pretty sure that the intent would carry over to Cooper.
-I'm becoming addicted to a number of these blawgs, particularly "I'm a P.D." which is linked from Justin's site. Keep up the good work and sorry about missing the fantasy football playoffs.
Posted by: Mark Porto at December 26, 2004 11:40 PM
Mark: Thanks for letting me know you read this thing. I always like to know when someone I know in the real world is reading.
I don't disagree with the transferred intent issue, but I seriously question whether there was intent to kill at all. If he intended to kill Jenkins I'd think the shot would be aimed at a larger target. The fact that the bullet grazed Jenkins' scalp suggests to me Lucky was trying to fire a shot in the air. Reckless and studid, yes. Intending to kill? I doubt it.
Thanks for the reminder on the P.D. blawg. I sorta forgot about that one. Oh, and blawg addiction is another good reason to have a laptop in class. Or maybe not.
Have fun in Vegas.
Posted by: Steve at December 27, 2004 12:41 AM
The defendant shot into the head of Jenkins. Most fortunately for Jenkins it was an not an accurate shot. Aimed at his head, but just off center. Clearly you didn't attend the trial and listen to the testmony. Ms. Cooper didnt't testify as a charater witness. Get the facts it's public information.
Posted by: Alex at December 29, 2004 11:06 PM
Alex, if you can explain to me how Jenna's mother's testimony had any relevance to the issue of whether Iromuanya intended to kill Jenkins, please do.
Also, if you are indeed Jenna's Aunt Martina or rather her cousin, Alexis, I'm very sorry about your loss. The analysis above is what law students and lawyers do. No ill will is intended toward anyone.
One of the both ugly and beautiful things about our jury system is that the jury has pretty much free reign to decide guilt or innocence based on what is presented to them. In this case, they saw intent to kill. I'm not sure I'd agree with that based on what I've read, seen and heard (I work across the street from the courthouse, by the way, so I did see some of the testimony), but I wasn't on the jury so it doesn't matter.
However, when judges allow what appears to me and many others to be irrelevant testimony they run the risk of being reversed and remanded. A new trial on the same issue is something that everyone dreads and it would be sad if it happened. I have a feeling the Appeals court will conclude the testimony was harmless error and uphold the 2nd degree murder conviction anyway.
Posted by: Steve at December 29, 2004 11:32 PM
I have a problem with the transferred intent issue, mainly because of the fact he was less then a few feet away from the so-called "intended" target. Maybe if he was more then 10 feet from the individual I could asume he was a bad shot but given the fact he was so close its hard to beleive that he missed from such close range. If he was truely tryin to kill Mr. Jenkins i'm sure he would probably be dead.
Posted by: marcel at May 9, 2005 03:11 PM