Fontaine v. People
62 V.I. 643
Supreme Court of The Virgin Is...2015Background
- On March 7, 2009 Phillip George was killed in a shootout outside a St. Thomas nightclub; Richie Fontaine was identified as a suspect and charged in a multi-count Information including first-degree murder and related offenses.
- At Fontaine’s first trial the jury acquitted him of first-degree murder but convicted him of voluntary manslaughter, first-degree assault (with intent to commit murder), weapon enhancements, and reckless endangerment; this Court reversed and remanded because a police officer improperly narrated an unobscured surveillance video to the jury.
- On remand Fontaine was charged in a fourth amended information with voluntary manslaughter, a firearm enhancement for manslaughter, first-degree assault (intent to murder), a firearm enhancement for assault, and reckless endangerment; after retrial he was convicted on those counts.
- The trial court dismissed the manslaughter convictions post-trial but left convictions for assault, firearm enhancement for assault, and reckless endangerment, and sentenced Fontaine to concurrent terms (15, 20, and 5 years respectively), to run consecutively to sentences in other cases.
- Fontaine appealed, arguing (1) double jeopardy because he had been acquitted of murder (and attempted murder) at the first trial, (2) that assault cannot exist when the victim died (so the assault conviction is for a “non‑existent” crime), and (3) sentencing violated 14 V.I.C. § 104’s single‑punishment rule.
Issues
| Issue | Fontaine's Argument | People/Respondent's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether retrial conviction for first‑degree assault (intent to murder) violated Double Jeopardy after acquittal of murder at first trial | Acquittal of murder precludes retrial/conviction for the lesser offense; re‑conviction for assault is barred | Acquittal of murder barred reprosecution for murder only; Fontaine’s assault conviction at first trial was reversed for procedural error so retrial does not violate Double Jeopardy (continuing jeopardy doctrine) | Affirmed: No Double Jeopardy violation because retrial followed reversal for procedural error and assault was properly pursued on remand |
| Whether conviction for first‑degree assault is impossible when victim died | An assault cannot exist if the victim was killed; conviction is for a “non‑existent” crime | Assault can be proven where defendant had intent/ability to kill or threatened conduct — death does not preclude assault liability | Affirmed: Assault remains a valid offense even if the victim died (court follows prior precedent) |
| Whether attempted murder and first‑degree assault (intent to murder) are the same offense such that acquittal of one bars conviction of the other | Acquittal of attempted murder should bar conviction for assault with intent to murder (same offense) | Issue waived because not raised below; court declines to decide equivalence on appeal | Waived: Issue not preserved; no plain‑error relief granted |
| Whether sentencing violated 14 V.I.C. § 104 (multiple punishments for single act) | Sentences for assault, firearm enhancement, and reckless endangerment impermissibly punish the same act multiple times | Reckless endangerment targets separate public/third‑party risk; firearm enhancement is a separate legislatively intended punishment; no § 104 violation | Affirmed: Sentences lawful under § 104 and precedent permitting cumulative sentencing for firearm use and separate crimes like reckless endangerment |
Key Cases Cited
- Green v. United States, 355 U.S. 184 (Sup. Ct.) (acquittal bars later prosecution for same offense)
- Price v. Georgia, 398 U.S. 323 (Sup. Ct.) (retrial on greater offense barred when reversal rests on insufficient evidence)
- DiFrancesco v. United States, 449 U.S. 117 (Sup. Ct.) (distinguishing reversals for insufficiency from other grounds affecting retrial rights)
- Lockhart v. Nelson, 488 U.S. 33 (Sup. Ct.) (Double Jeopardy does not bar retrial after conviction vacated for non‑insufficiency error)
- Justices of Boston Mun. Court v. Lydon, 466 U.S. 294 (Sup. Ct.) (continuing jeopardy concept and retrial after successful appeal)
- Phillip v. People, 58 V.I. 569 (V.I. 2013) (assault conviction can stand even if victim is killed)
- Fontaine v. People, 56 V.I. 571 (V.I. 2012) (prior appeal reversing convictions due to improper video narration)
- Ward v. People, 58 V.I. 277 (V.I. 2013) (legislative intent supports cumulative punishment for firearm enhancement plus underlying violent crime)
- Thomas v. People, 60 V.I. 183 (V.I. 2013) (reckless endangerment is distinct from underlying violent offense and punishable separately)