Kohler v. State
203 Md. App. 110
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2012Background
- Kohler, who used counterfeit money to buy four pounds of marijuana, fled after the deal.
- Yates pursued Kohler and, during the chase, fired at Kohler; one of the shots killed Shirley Worcester, an innocent bystander.
- State charged Kohler with second-degree felony murder, conspiracy to distribute marijuana, and possession with intent to distribute.
- Sufficiency of evidence for felony murder hinged on whether Kohler could be a second-degree principal in distribution under Maryland law.
- Court declined to sustain distribution as predicate; held buyer-as-distributor theory expands participation too far and rejected it.
- Court reversed Kohler’s felony murder and conspiracy convictions, affirmed the possession-with-intent-to-distribute conviction, and left double jeopardy concerns preclude retrial on the former predicates.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for distribution as second-degree principal | State argues Kohler aided in distribution by arranging and receiving the drugs. | Kohler contends a buyer cannot be a distributor or aider/abettor. | Insufficient; buyer cannot be second-degree principal in distribution. |
| Sufficiency of felony murder predicated on distribution | State asserts felony murder grounded on Kohler’s participation in distribution. | Kohler maintains distribution cannot be proven; felony murder premised on an invalid predicate. | Reversed based on insufficiency of the underlying distribution; retrial barred by double jeopardy. |
| Sufficiency of conspiracy to distribute | State claims Kohler conspired with Yates and Griffin to distribute. | No meeting of the minds; a buyer cannot conspire to distribute. | Conspiracy conviction reversed. |
| Whether possession with intent to distribute could have served as an alternate predicate | N/A (argument focused on distribution) | N/A | Court notes possession with intent to distribute could be predicate, but retrial on felony murder with that predicate barred by double jeopardy. |
Key Cases Cited
- Abuelhawa v. United States, 556 U.S. 816 (U.S. 2009) (buyer facilitation of drug distribution rejected; limits on ‘facilitate’)
- Hyche v. Indiana, 934 N.E.2d 1176 (Ind.Ct.App.2010) (buyer’s role insufficient to sustain dealing/felony murder conviction)
- Rhode Island v. Oliveira & Hill, 882 A.2d 1097 (R.I.2005) (no distribution-based felony murder for mere purchase/possession absent redistribution steps)
- Graves v. Kentucky, 17 S.W.3d 858 (Ky.2000) (trafficking-based murder convictions upheld where evidence showed distribution steps; not directly on point but informs approach to predicate)
- Oliveira & Hill, Rhode Island v. Oliveira and Hill (R.I.2005) (discusses distinction between sale/delivery/distribute vs. poss./receive)