Blaize v. United States
21 A.3d 78
D.C.2011Background
- Appellant Marlon Blaize convicted of voluntary manslaughter while armed, ADW, carrying a pistol without a license, and two PFCV counts.
- Incident occurred August 12, 2006 on Fairmont Street, NW; shooting and hit-and-run involving a speeding car.
- Victim Terran Miller died August 18, 2006 from injuries sustained when struck by the car.
- Car driver fled the scene; eyewitnesses described gunfire directed at Miller and ensuing panic leading to flight.
- Medical examiner classified Miller’s death as homicide; issue arises whether death causation was sufficiently tied to Blaize’s actions.
- Appeal challenges causation instruction, admissibility of medical examiner testimony, and merger of PFCV convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intervening/superseding cause instruction. | Blaize argues missing intervening/superseding cause instruction. | State contends general causation instruction suffices. | No plain error; general instruction adequate. |
| Causation sufficiency for voluntary manslaughter. | Evidence insufficient to show Miller’s death was a reasonably foreseeable consequence. | Firing toward Miller foreseeably caused flight and death; sufficient evidence. | Evidence supports proximate cause; sufficient for conviction. |
| Medical examiner testimony on homicide/ultimate cause. | Testimony invaded mental state and improperly defined cause of death. | testimony properly explained manner of death within permissible scope. | Testimony kept within bounds; did not usurp jury function. |
| Merger of PFCV convictions. | Two PFCV counts should merge since single gun and victim. | Counts do not merge as separate impulses; distinct offenses. | PFCV convictions do not merge; separate offenses sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Butts v. United States, 822 A.2d 407 (D.C.2003) (intervening cause and proximate cause framework)
- Roy v. United States, 871 A.2d 498 (D.C.2005) (cause-in-fact and proximate cause elements)
- McKinnon v. United States, 550 A.2d 915 (D.C.1988) (foreseeability in proximate cause analysis)
- Lacy v. District of Columbia, 424 A.2d 317 (D.C.1980) (proximate cause policy element guidance)
- Spain v. United States, 665 A.2d 658 (D.C.1995) (fork-in-the-road doctrine for successive offenses)
- Wages v. United States, 952 A.2d 952 (D.C.2008) (non-merger of multiple PFCV counts from separate impulses)
- Walker v. United States, 982 A.2d 723 (D.C.2009) (PFCV non-merger and attribution of liability for multiple offenses)
- Gaines v. United States, 994 A.2d 391 (D.C.2010) (authority on admissibility of expert testimony and ultimate facts)