State v. Friesz
2017 ND 177
| N.D. | 2017Background
- On Oct. 9, 2014, Rodney Friesz shot Geno Jassmann in a Mandan home; while Jassmann was still breathing Friesz started a fire and left. Police and firefighters responded; firefighters reported a body and firearms inside.
- A firefighter observed a rifle leaning against a wall and removed it for safety, handing it to an officer outside. Officers briefly entered (about 2–3 feet) to confirm the presence of the body, then obtained a warrant and executed a full search.
- Friesz made multiple statements to detectives admitting he shot Jassmann (claiming self-defense) and that he obtained gasoline and ignited the fire while Jassmann was still breathing.
- Autopsy concluded cause of death was a gunshot wound to the head with contributory smoke inhalation; wound likely non-survivable, but soot in trachea indicated breathing after the shooting.
- District court denied Friesz’s pretrial motion to suppress (applying the emergency exception to the rifle seizure and the inevitable discovery doctrine to the officers’ brief entry), and a jury convicted Friesz of manslaughter (lesser-included) and arson.
- Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed convictions but remanded to correct a clerical error in the judgment (it incorrectly recited a plea of guilty rather than a jury verdict).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Friesz) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Admissibility of rifle and officers’ entry — emergency exception | Emergency existed: active smoke/fire, firefighters entering, rifle posed risk to responders; seizure and brief entry were reasonable and safety-motivated | No exigency: fire was small/contained, perimeter secured, no risk to life/evidence, so warrantless seizure/entry violated Fourth Amendment | Court: Emergency exception justified removal of rifle; brief entry to confirm body was reasonable and tied to ongoing emergency |
| 2) Admissibility of body observation — inevitable discovery | Even if entry was improper, firefighters’ lawful observations and other information would have led to a warrant and lawful discovery of the body | Officers acted in bad faith/shortcuts to accelerate discovery; inevitable discovery inapplicable | Court: Officers acted in good faith; body inevitably would have been discovered (warrant supported by firefighters’ reports) |
| 3) Sufficiency re: self-defense (manslaughter) | Evidence (admissions, inconsistent stories, lack of knife, witness testimony, victim breathing during fire) supports rejecting self-defense and finding culpability | Friesz reasonably believed he faced imminent deadly harm; jury should have found self-defense | Court: Viewing evidence in light most favorable to verdict, competent evidence supports jury’s rejection of self-defense; manslaughter conviction stands |
| 4) Sufficiency re: intent for arson | Circumstantial evidence supports intent to start fire to destroy structure/evidence or kill victim; multiple inferences available to jury | No proof he intended to destroy the house; he still had property there and allegedly started fire to defend himself | Court: Sufficient evidence for jury to infer intent to destroy part of building or alternate concurrent intents; arson conviction stands |
| 5) Clerical error in judgment | N/A | Judgment incorrectly states plea of guilty though conviction was by jury | Court: Affirmed convictions but remanded for district court to correct clerical error under Rule 36 |
Key Cases Cited
- Kentucky v. King, 563 U.S. 452 (exigent-circumstances standard for warrantless entry)
- Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385 (police may make prompt warrantless searches at homicide scenes to look for victims or killers)
- Michigan v. Clifford, 464 U.S. 287 (analysis of warrantless entries and privacy expectations in fire-damaged premises)
- Michigan v. Tyler, 436 U.S. 499 (post-fire warrantless presence and reasonable time to investigate after extinguishment)
- Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (exclusionary rule applying to illegally obtained evidence in state courts)
- Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (inevitable discovery doctrine permitting admission if evidence would have been discovered legally)