State v. Lomba, 37 A.3d 615

The feud between Lomba and Joseph and Susan Rocheleau escalated into a July 11, 2008 brawl after Joseph and Susan confronted Lomba at the Little Rhody Beagle Club in Warwick over the Pacifica.
Lomba, Leonard Rocheleau’s friend, possessed the gray Pacifica and had been engaged in prior tensions with the Rocheleaus.
In the Beagle Club parking lot, Susan and Joseph attempted to pry the license plate from the Pacifica, believing the plate belonged to a demolished Leonard-owned Taurus.
During the ensuing melee, Susan was punched and Joseph was cut with a utility knife; Lomba fled, and later his car collided with a dump truck after being driven in reverse.
The state charged Lomba with three counts of assault with a dangerous weapon and one count of simple assault; he was acquitted of the felony counts but convicted of simple assault, with a concurrent no-contact order issued for the Rocheleaus and Leonard.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the evidence supports a judgment of acquittal on simple assault	Lomba contends no malice or wantonness existed.	Lomba argues lack of malice shows no wrongful intent.	No error; sufficient evidence supported malice/wantonness.
Whether the trial court properly exercised evidentiary discretion affecting self-defense and cross-examination	Defense claims rulings limited the defense’s presentation.	Lomba says cross-examination and evidence were improperly curtailed.	Discretion upheld; no clear abuse impacting due process.
Whether the out-of-court statement about a hate crime was admissible	State argues statement as hearsay; relevance to state of mind is limited.	Defense sought state-of-mind context for prejudice.	No error; ruling consistent with Bustamante and limits on state-of-mind evidence.
Whether the mutual restraining orders and DEA documents rulings were properly instructed/reviewed	Requests to strike or clarify restraining order status were improper.	Defendant challenged access to DEA records and in-camera review.	No error; defendant received correct, non-prejudicial rulings and review.

State v. Brown, 9 A.3d 1232 (R.I.2010) (standard for reviewing denial of judgment of acquittal)
State v. Caba, 887 A.2d 370 (R.I.2005) (standard for appellate view of trial evidence)
State v. Henshaw, 557 A.2d 1204 (R.I.1989) (guidance on reasonable inferences in sufficiency review)
State v. Hornoff, 760 A.2d 927 (R.I.2000) (limits on review of jury verdicts and evidence)
State v. Blood, 70 R.I. 85 (R.I.1944) (malice/wantonness as a basis for simple assault)
State v. Gilligan, 23 R.I. 400 (R.I.1901) (definition of malicious as wrongful intent)
State v. Ventre, 811 A.2d 1178 (R.I.2002) (self-defense evidentiary considerations)
State v. Soto, 477 A.2d 945 (R.I.1984) (role of relevant, non-cumulative evidence in self-defense)
State v. Tribble, 428 A.2d 1079 (R.I.1981) (limits on establishing self-defense through victim’s aggressor status)
State v. Bustamante, 756 A.2d 758 (R.I.2000) (state-of-mind evidence cannot be based on declarant’s statements to others)
State v. Harnois, 638 A.2d 532 (R.I.1994) (prohibition on using unsworn out-of-court statements to prove state of mind)