Monday, September 18, 2017

Don't drink 18 beers and extra shots of vodka when you are planning a murder, even if you shout that you are a gang member and are not afraid of the police! 

2018-M-280       State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. David Muniz Bustos, Appellant.

THE CRIME:  In 2011, Bustos and Dominga Limon began a romantic relationship that, by
February 2012, had lasted for eight months.  During part of that period, Bustos and
Limon lived together in Silver Lake.  After Limon moved to Glencoe to start a new job,
the couple continued to date. 

On the night of the murder, February 21, 2012, Bustos went to Limon’s apartment around 7:00 p.m.  Prior to arriving, Bustos drank 18 cans of beer.  Limon left the apartment around 9:00 p.m. to meet her daughter, who was planning to stay at Limon’s apartment.  While Limon was away, Bustos drank shots of vodka.

After Limon and her daughter returned to the apartment, Limon prepared for work.   Limon asked her daughter to hide the alcohol from Bustos because he was intoxicated.  Limon’s daughter overheard Limon and Bustos arguing.  During the argument, Bustos accused Limon of preparing to see her new boyfriend rather than preparing for work.    Limon told Bustos that he could either sleep until he was sober or leave right away.

Limon’s daughter went outside to retrieve the rest of her belongings from her car and send a text message to her boyfriend.  She was outside the apartment for approximately 10 minutes when she heard her mother yelling for her.  As she went inside, she looked through the window and believed she saw Bustos striking her mother.  Limon’s daughter ran inside and forced Bustos to leave the apartment by hitting him with her keys and throwing a pan at him.  She called 911 as Bustos left the apartment.

After leaving the apartment, Bustos walked up and down the street in front of the apartment, yelling that he was part of a gang and that he was not afraid of the police.  When Limon’s daughter returned to the apartment, Limon was lying on the floor, surrounded by blood.  The police arrived shortly after the emergency call and observed Bustos running in the street near the apartment.  Bustos first ran toward the police; then he stopped and ran in the opposite direction.  The police reached Bustos and handcuffed him.  One arresting officer testified that Bustos smelled “very heavily of alcohol.”  The
other arresting officer testified that Bustos’s speech was very slurred and his balance was staggered.  The officers took Bustos into custody.

One of the responding officers entered the apartment, where she saw Limon on the living-room floor surrounded by blood and vomit.  Limon had seven stab wounds to her chest and left arm along with three stab wounds to her right hand.  Limon told the paramedics that Bustos had stabbed her with a knife.  An officer later recovered a bloody knife from underneath an entertainment center in the living room.  After Limon arrived at the emergency room, she was airlifted to Hennepin County Medical Center, where she died from a lack of oxygen to her brain due to blood loss caused by the multiple stab wounds.

MAJORITY:  A jury found David Muniz Bustos guilty of first-degree murder while committing
domestic abuse, Minn. Stat. § 609.185(a)(6) (2014), second-degree intentional murder, second-degree felony murder, and third-degree murder.
 
In this direct appeal, Bustos seeks a new trial on the first-degree domestic-abuse murder charge, arguing that the district court committed reversible error when it instructed the jury on the law and when it limited defense counsel’s closing argument.  Bustos also argues that he is entitled to a new trial on the charge of second-degree intentional murder because the district court committed reversible error when it excluded relevant and material evidence.  

We reverse Bustos’s first-degree murder conviction and remand for a new trial on that charge because the district court committed multiple plain errors that, taken cumulatively, seriously affected the fairness, integrity and public reputation of the judicial proceedings.  We also conclude that any alleged error based on the exclusion of Bustos’s preliminary breath test results was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

HELD:  1. The district court committed plain error when it precluded defense counsel from arguing that the State had failed to prove any alleged incident of prior domestic abuse beyond a reasonable doubt.

2. The district court also committed plain error when it gave the jury an incorrect definition of domestic abuse.

3. The cumulative effect of the district court’s errors affected appellant’s substantial rights.  A new trial on the charge of first-degree domestic-abuse murder is required because the errors, taken together, seriously affected the fairness, integrity, and public reputation of judicial proceedings.

4. There is no reasonable possibility that the exclusion of the preliminary breath test results contributed to the jury’s finding of guilt on the second-degree intentional murder charge.  Therefore, even if the exclusion was erroneous, any potential error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

 Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for a new trial.

DISSENT:  Justices Wright, Gildea, and Dietzen opined: “The majority concludes, and I agree, that a past pattern of domestic abuse may be proven, as is the case here, by incidents of domestic abuse against more than one victim. 

I also agree that the district court utilized the term “any” in an ambiguous manner when it precluded defense counsel from arguing that the State was required to prove “any” alleged incident of prior domestic abuse beyond a reasonable doubt.  I disagree, however, that this ambiguous use of the term “any,” when combined with any error in the definition of domestic abuse provided to the jury by the district court, was a plain error that affected Bustos’s substantial rights.  Because Bustos is both entitled to and in fact received a fair trial, not a perfect one, I respectfully dissent.

Anderson (Page, Stras, and Lillehaug)
Dissent:  Wright, Gildea, and Dietzen
[MURDER]

No comments:

Post a Comment