Com. v. Paris, G.
413 WDA 2015
Pa. Super. Ct.Dec 19, 2016Background
- In Nov 2013, Thor, a Siberian Husky owned by Mark Boehler, was taken from his yard; appellant Gisele Paris later brought Thor to the Animal Rescue League and then to a vet.
- The Rescue League deemed Thor non-adoptable due to age and a perianal tumor; appellant retrieved the dog after learning this.
- In January 2014 a veterinarian at Penn Animal Hospital told appellant the tumor was treatable; appellant later obtained an in-home euthanasia for Thor on Feb 10, 2014, signing a form claiming ownership.
- Police investigation tied a prior Animal Friends complaint (caller “Susan Elliot”) to appellant; she resisted arrest when officers served a warrant and was seen behaving belligerently.
- Appellant was tried and convicted of animal cruelty (willfully and maliciously killing a dog), theft by unlawful taking, and receipt of stolen property; separate resisting-arrest/simple-assault charges were brought but not tried with these counts.
- Sentenced to 3–6 months’ incarceration and 18 months’ probation; appeal raised three issues about jury instruction (malice), refusal to instruct mistake/ignorance of fact, and admissibility of arrest conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Paris) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether jury question asking whether "malicious" applies to the animal, the killing, or people required a specific supplemental instruction | The original statutory instruction and general definition of malice adequately explained elements; jury should follow given instructions | Court should have told jury that "willfully and maliciously" applies specifically to the act of killing | Court affirmed: directing jurors to the written/oral instruction was adequate; no abuse of discretion in declining more specific wording |
| Whether court erred by refusing to instruct on mistake/ignorance of fact (belief Thor was dying/in pain) | Not applicable (Commonwealth opposed) | Appellant argued a reasonable, bona fide mistake that Thor was dying would negate mens rea and required instruction | Court affirmed: no instruction warranted because appellant failed to show that such a mistake would negate malice under the statute; mistake of fact would not render the act innocent here |
| Whether trial court erred in admitting evidence of appellant’s behavior during arrest after denying joinder of resisting-arrest/simple-assault charges | Conduct at arrest is part of the res gestae and probative of intent/malice; admissible in limited form | Admission was unduly prejudicial and inconsistent with denial of joinder (charging those counts) | Court affirmed: trial court properly allowed evidence of conduct (not the charges) as relevant history; not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Hartman, 536 Pa. 211 (general rule on jury instructions and their purpose)
- Commonwealth v. Davalos, 779 A.2d 1190 (trial judge's discretion on supplemental jury instructions)
- Commonwealth v. Scott, 73 A.3d 599 (mistake-of-fact doctrine can negate criminal intent if bona fide and reasonable)
- Commonwealth v. Reese, 31 A.3d 708 (appellate court may affirm on any valid ground supported by record)
- Commonwealth v. Poplawski, 130 A.3d 697 (standard of review for admissibility of evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Paddy, 800 A.2d 294 (trial court not required to "sanitize" trial; relevant unpleasant facts may be admitted as part of the events)