State v. Cameron Albarelli, 159 A.3d 627

Background

On July 18, 2013, a midnight altercation on Church Street in Burlington involved two groups of men; defendant Cameron Albarelli was accused of repeatedly punching a man who was not fighting back. Police were called and Albarelli fled the scene.
Officers stopped two men matching descriptions; Albarelli initially denied being on Church Street, then said he had been outnumbered and fled, and when asked for identification gave the name "Cameron Mitchell" and an incorrect birth year before later giving his true name and birth date.
A jury convicted Albarelli of simple assault (13 V.S.A. § 1023(a)(1)), disorderly conduct (13 V.S.A. § 1026(1)), and giving false information to a police officer with intent to deflect an investigation (13 V.S.A. § 1754(a)).
At trial the court refused a requested self-defense instruction; defendant did not present evidence or witnesses at trial.
At sentencing the court imposed 60 days to two years (sixty days to be served) and imposed standard probation conditions A–N plus additional conditions; defendant appealed convictions and multiple probation conditions.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court erred in refusing self-defense instruction for simple assault	No error; record lacks evidence raising honest, reasonable belief of imminent harm	Self-defense available because complainant was larger and stepped toward defendant	Affirmed — defendant failed to make prima facie showing of honest, reasonable belief of imminent bodily harm, so instruction properly denied
Sufficiency of evidence and jury unanimity for disorderly conduct conviction	Evidence showed defendant engaged in fighting behavior in a public place and recklessly created public risk; jury unanimity instruction sufficient when read with opening/closing	Insufficient evidence that he "engaged" in fighting or acted recklessly; jury may not have been unanimous about which act supported conviction	Affirmed on sufficiency; unanimity claim reviewed for plain error and denied because prosecution and defense consistently argued disorderly conduct stemmed from fight with complainant’s brother and general unanimity instruction was given
Sufficiency and scope of § 1754(a) conviction for false information to officer (intent to deflect)	Statute criminalizes knowingly giving false info with purpose to implicate or to deflect; evidence (fleeing, false name, incorrect DOB, later correction) supports intent to deflect	Giving a false name alone is insufficient; statute must be narrowly construed to avoid criminalizing protected speech	Affirmed — statute construed to require conscious purpose to deflect investigation; circumstantial evidence reasonably supported jury finding of intent to deflect
Validity and scope of probation conditions imposed	Many standard supervision and rehabilitation conditions are permissible; some conditions lack nexus or unlawfully delegate discretion	Sentence unlawfully imposed blanket standard conditions; various conditions are overbroad, lack nexus, or delegate authority to probation officer	Mixed: affirmed many conditions (A, B, F, G, H, J, L, N as modified, P, S, 3, 4, 34, 35, 37); struck C, D, E, M, O, Q, R, 1, 32 and remanded I, K, 5, 31 for clarification or justification

Key Cases Cited

State v. Knapp, 509 A.2d 1010 (Vt. 1986) (prima facie requirement for defense instruction)
State v. Shaw, 721 A.2d 486 (Vt. 1998) (self-defense requires honest, reasonable belief of imminent harm)
State v. Forant, 719 A.2d 339 (Vt. 1998) (once defense is produced State must disprove beyond reasonable doubt)
State v. Delaoz, 22 A.3d 388 (Vt. 2010) (circumstantial evidence can support intent to avoid prosecution)
State v. Gilman, 608 A.2d 660 (Vt. 1992) (when multiple acts could constitute offense, State must specify act to protect unanimity)
State v. Pickett, 403 A.2d 272 (Vt. 1979) (disorderly conduct may be supported by public threatening or tumultuous behavior)
State v. Lund, 475 A.2d 1055 (Vt. 1984) (disorderly conduct may be based on public place conduct with or without large crowd)
State v. Putnam, 130 A.3d 826 (Vt. 2015) (standards for reviewing and imposing probation conditions)