Peo v. Le Ber
22CA1048
Colo. Ct. App.Aug 15, 2024Background
- Tyler Todd Le Ber was convicted by jury of several assault-related offenses following a physical altercation with his girlfriend, S.B., which resulted in multiple injuries, including a subdural hematoma.
- Le Ber was charged with multiple counts: first degree assault, four counts of second degree assault, felony menacing, and misdemeanor child abuse.
- The jury acquitted him of first degree assault and one count of second degree assault, but convicted on other counts; serious bodily injury was a required element for some charges.
- Upon special interrogatories, certain charges were downgraded: one was reduced to third degree assault, and felony menacing was downgraded to misdemeanor menacing.
- Le Ber appealed, arguing there was insufficient evidence to support the finding that S.B.'s subdural hematoma constituted "serious bodily injury."
- The Court of Appeals vacated the count for second degree assault (serious bodily injury), remanding for entry of third degree assault, but otherwise affirmed the convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for serious bodily injury | Subdural hematoma involved substantial risk of death | Actual injury did not present substantial risk of death per Vigil | Evidence insufficient; conviction for this count vacated, remanded |
| Remedy for insufficient evidence | Not expressly stated | Acquittal, or at minimum reduction to lesser included offense | Remand for entry of verdict on third degree assault |
| Merger/double jeopardy between assault counts | Multiple distinct acts supported separate counts | Acts were not distinct; counts should merge | No merger required; sufficient acts for separate convictions |
| Standard of review/preservation | De novo review applies | Conceded de novo review; plain error standard for unpreserved | De novo on legal issues, plain error for unpreserved merger claim |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Vigil, 491 P.3d 606 (Colo. 2021) (defining serious bodily injury by actual risk, not hypothetical risk, tied to the facts of the case)
- Clark v. People, 232 P.3d 1287 (Colo. 2010) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
- Quintano v. People, 105 P.3d 585 (Colo. 2005) (factors for determining merger of offenses/double jeopardy)
- Halaseh v. People, 464 P.3d 522 (Colo. 2020) (remand for entry of judgment on lesser included offense when jury finds guilty on greater offense)