320 P.3d 455
Mont.2014Background
- On Dec. 16, 2011 police responded to a 911 report of an erratically driven maroon pickup; officers located a red pickup driven by William Shegrud with his 5‑year‑old daughter in a child seat.
- Officers observed signs of intoxication (odor of alcohol, red/watery eyes, slurred speech); Shegrud told officers he had consumed two “tallboys” and taken prescribed oxycodone.
- Shegrud was arrested for DUI and criminal endangerment; blood tests later showed BAC .07 and oxycodone .06 mg/L (below legal limits/within therapeutic range with margin of error).
- First jury trial ended in mistrial on felony counts; at the second trial the district court refused Shegrud’s requested instruction that negligent endangerment is a lesser included offense of criminal endangerment.
- The jury convicted Shegrud of felony criminal endangerment; he was sentenced as a persistent felony offender. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether negligent endangerment is a statutory lesser included offense of criminal endangerment and whether the district court erred by refusing the instruction | State argued the felony criminal‑endangerment instruction was proper and evidence supported knowing conduct | Shegrud argued negligent endangerment (negligent mental state) is a lesser included offense and evidence supported that instruction | Court held negligent endangerment is a statutory lesser included offense of criminal endangerment and that sufficient evidence warranted giving the instruction; failure to give it was an abuse of discretion, so conviction reversed and case remanded. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Feltz, 355 Mont. 308, 227 P.3d 1035 (2010) (standard for when lesser included‑offense instruction must be given)
- State v. Martinosky, 294 Mont. 427, 982 P.2d 440 (1999) (refused negligent‑endangerment instruction where evidence clearly showed knowing conduct)
- State v. Lambert, 280 Mont. 231, 929 P.2d 846 (1996) (criminal endangerment is a result‑based offense; definitions of knowing mental state)
- State v. Martinez, 291 Mont. 265, 968 P.2d 705 (1998) (lesser‑included instruction improper where defendant’s theory, if believed, would require acquittal)
- State v. Matz, 335 Mont. 201, 150 P.3d 367 (2006) (jury instructions reviewed for whether they fully and fairly instruct the law)