State v. Anderson, 364 P.3d 306

Background

On Nov. 19, 2010, at a house party Defendant Joe Anderson and Vicente Sanchez fought; Sanchez was shot six times from 2–3 feet away and died. Defendant was charged with second-degree murder.
During the brawl Sanchez’s girlfriend briefly displayed a handgun; Defendant also drew a handgun and fired, asserting self-defense.
The district court agreed both a general self-defense instruction (UJI 14-5171) and a no-retreat/stand-your-ground instruction (UJI 14-5190) were warranted, but due to oversight UJI 14-5190 was omitted from the written and oral instructions given to the jury.
During deliberations the jury asked whether New Mexico had a “stand-your-ground” law, then withdrew the question saying it had “found what it was looking for.” Defense counsel mistakenly believed UJI 14-5190 had been given.
Defendant was convicted of second-degree murder; on appeal he argued (1) fundamental error from omission of UJI 14-5190, (2) improper admission of investigative diagrams, and (3) error in refusing a modification to UJI 14-250.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether omission of UJI 14-5190 (no-retreat) was fundamental error	State: omission was Defendant’s responsibility to catch; no fundamental error	Anderson: omission misdirected jury on critical definition of “reasonable” in self-defense	Reversed: omission was fundamental error because no-retreat was critical to reasonableness determination and jury was misdirected
Whether the court had duty to give definitional/no-retreat instruction when warranted	State: instruction amplifies element and Defendant should have ensured it was included	Anderson: where court determined instruction warranted, court had duty to fully instruct	Court: duty rests with court once evidence warrants the instruction; omission undermined jury’s ability to apply correct standard
Admissibility of detective’s diagrams under Rule 11-403 (misleading/cumulative)	State: diagrams were probative and labeled not to scale; witnesses and photos corroborated layout	Anderson: diagrams could mislead jury about room size/furniture placement	Affrmed: no abuse of discretion; probative value not substantially outweighed by risk of misleading jurors
Whether district court erred refusing defendant’s modification to UJI 14-250	State: uniform UJIs must not be substantively modified; existing instructions covered the point	Anderson: requested language would prevent jurors from considering provocation once self-defense not disproved	Affirmed: court properly refused modification; existing UJIs adequately instructed jury

Key Cases Cited

State v. Benally, 131 N.M. 258, 34 P.3d 1134 (court must fully and clearly instruct jury on self-defense when any evidence supports it)
State v. Barber, 135 N.M. 621, 92 P.3d 633 (analysis of when omitted definitional instruction can cause juror confusion and constitute fundamental error)
State v. Cunningham, 128 N.M. 711, 998 P.2d 176 (definition of fundamental error standard)
State v. Heisler, 58 N.M. 446, 272 P.2d 660 (longstanding rule that court must instruct on self-defense if any evidence supports it)
State v. Sandoval, 150 N.M. 224, 258 P.3d 1016 (framework for reviewing omitted instructions in context of the whole record)
State v. Mascareñas, 129 N.M. 230, 4 P.3d 1221 (distinguishing definitional instruction that functions like an element instruction)
Brown v. United States, 256 U.S. 335 (retreat/failure to retreat as factor in reasonableness in self-defense)
Rowe v. United States, 164 U.S. 546 (authority that law may not require retreat when faced with deadly force)
State v. Navarez, 148 N.M. 820, 242 P.3d 387 (jury question can be evidence of juror confusion)