Baumia v. Commonwealth
2013 Ky. LEXIS 247
Ky.2013Background
- Baumia was convicted by a Jefferson Circuit Court jury of murder, first-degree wanton endangerment, first-degree criminal mischief, and driving under the influence; she received a 35-year sentence and appeals as a matter of right.
- Factual la nderpinning the verdict: Baumia attended a party, consumed alcohol, and after a dispute with Cedric Thompson attempted to drive home; witnesses observed aggressive driving and speeding through a stop sign before a collision.
- The collision injures Geitgey and Crump’s property; Geitgey dies the following day; Baumia was observed to be intoxicated by officers, EMTs, and hospital staff.
- Baumia admitted consuming about six beers; blood tests later indicated a high BAC (.23–.26) at the time of the collision; she was charged with multiple offenses and the jury convicted on all but one charge (tampering with evidence).
- During trial, multiple evidentiary challenges were raised, including pre-arrest silence, a police video, a 911 recording, Baumia’s use of profanity, and the introduction of a misdemeanor theft-by-deception conviction at sentencing.
- The Court affirms Baumia’s convictions and the 35-year sentence, addressing each challenged issue and concluding any error was harmless or the evidence otherwise sufficient.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pre-arrest silence in case-in-chief | Baumia argues pre-arrest silence was improperly admitted. | Commonwealth contends permissible impeachment or admissibility under law. | Abuse; error harmless beyond reasonable doubt. |
| Accident-scene video admissibility | Video was cumulative and unduly prejudicial under KRE 403. | Video provided accurate depiction of scene and was probative. | Not reversible error; palpable error not shown. |
| 911 recording admissibility | Recording is irrelevant or prejudicial under KRE 403. | Recording helps timeline and context of events. | Admissible; not abused discretion. |
| Baumia's post-collision profanity | Profanity is irrelevant character evidence. | Juror relevance to intoxication; probative value outweighs prejudice. | Harmless; substantial evidence of guilt supports conviction. |
| Admission of theft-by-deception conviction during sentencing | Discovery violation; conviction should not have been admitted. | Constitutional or statutory basis for admission; impact limited. | Discovery violation occurred but not prejudicial; no remand; inadmissibility issues addressed; sentence affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Thompson, 11 S.W.3d 575 (Ky. 2000) (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- Star v. Commonwealth, 313 S.W.3d 30 (Ky. 2010) (abuse of discretion in mistrial decisions)
- Griffin v. California, 380 U.S. 609 (1965) (prohibition on comment on silence)
- Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976) (post-arrest silence cannot be used to impeach)
- Jenkins v. Anderson, 447 U.S. 231 (1980) (pre-arrest silence may be used for impeachment)
- KRS 7.24, not a case; rule cited as statute (–) (discovery procedures in Kentucky criminal procedure)
- Chestnut v. Commonwealth, 250 S.W.3d 288 (Ky. 2008) (purpose of discovery to inform defense)
- Beaty v. Commonwealth, 125 S.W.3d 196 (Ky. 2003) (prejudice analysis in discovery violation)
- Green v. Commonwealth, 815 S.W.2d 398 (Ky. 1991) (court prohibits using defendant's silence in case-in-chief)
- Hager v. Commonwealth, 702 S.W.2d 431 (Ky. 1986) (refusal to submit to BAC test admissible)
- Wheeler v. Commonwealth, 121 S.W.3d 173 (Ky. 2003) (evidentiary value of crime-scene testimony)
- Neville, South Dakota v. Neville (459 U.S. 553 (1983)) (breath-test refusal in DUI context; admissibility under due process)
- United States v. Greenfield, 474 U.S. 284 (1986) (impeachment and silence under Miranda)