People v. Doubleday
2012 COA 141
Colo. Ct. App.2012Background
- December 2006 shooting at a convenience store recorded by surveillance video.
- Defendant Doubleday was charged with first-degree murder, first-degree felony murder, attempted aggravated robbery, two accessory counts, and two crime-of-violence counts.
- The jury acquitted him of attempted aggravated robbery but convicted him of second-degree murder and felony murder; the court merged the murder convictions and sentenced him to life.
- Special interrogatory was asked regarding attempted aggravated robbery; jury found not guilty of that count based on duress.
- Duress is an affirmative defense; the court instructed on various theories, including the duress defense, and the defendant challenged the verdict and CRE 606(b) implications.
- The court remanded to correct the mittimus to reflect convictions only for second-degree murder and felony murder.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Felony murder requires predicate offense proof, even without predicate conviction. | People argues predicate proven beyond reasonable doubt; conviction need not prove predicate. | Doubleday argues predicate conviction must accompany felony murder. | Predicate need only be committed/attempted, not convicted. |
| Does the duress defense defeat the predicate offense for felony murder when predicate acquitted due to duress? | People contends duress may coexist with predicate proof. | Doubleday contends duress defeats liability for the predicate. | Duress does not negate the predicate beyond reasonable doubt; felony murder still valid if predicate attempted/committed. |
| Was CRE 606(b) violated by the special interrogatory given to the jury? | People contends the interrogatory aided verdict validity. | Doubleday contends it impermissibly accessed deliberations. | No CRE 606(b) violation; interrogatory properly used to ensure unanimity and verdict validity. |
| Should the jury have been instructed on duress as a defense to felony murder or second-degree murder? | People argues proper instruction required if evidence supports duress. | Doubleday contends duress invalid for felony murder and not applicable to second-degree murder. | No error; duress not a defense to felony murder or to second-degree murder given evidence. |
| Was the challenged juror properly treated for cause? | Defense challenged juror due to equivocal answers and perceived bias. | Doubleday contends bias warranted cause dismissal. | Court did not abuse discretion; juror deemed capable of impartial verdict. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Garcia, 253 P.3d 1273 (Colo.App.2011) (Colo. App. on felony murder predicate/conviction relation; interpreting elements)
- United States v. Greene, 834 F.2d 1067 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (No requirement to convict underlying felony to sustain felony murder)
- Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197 (U.S. 1977) (Affirmative defenses separate from offense elements; burden-shifting)
- People v. Pickering, 276 P.3d 553 (Colo.2011) (Affirmative vs traverse defenses; burden to negate applies to defenses)
- State v. White, 477 N.W.2d 24 (Neb. 1991) (Felony murder principles; predicate offense not required to be convicted)
- Commonwealth v. Munchinski, 401 Pa. Super. 300, 585 A.2d 471 (Pa. Super. 1990) (Affirmative defenses and felony murder relations)
- People v. Blue, 253 P.3d 1273 (Colo.App.2011) (Multiple offenses; overlap in liability for felonies)