510 P.3d 502
Ariz. Ct. App.2022Background
- Defendant George Teran struck and killed a pedestrian who stepped off a median into the roadway; Teran was driving 44–55 mph in a 40 mph zone and did not brake or swerve.
- After the crash Teran exhibited slurred speech and "droopy" eyes; he admitted prior marijuana use and had contraband (marijuana wax, partial Xanax) in his car.
- Blood tests showed ~36 ng/mL alprazolam (Xanax) and ~14 ng/mL THC; carboxy-THC was present but does not indicate impairment.
- Charges included second-degree murder (reduced at trial), manslaughter (jury convicted on this lesser-included), two misdemeanor DUIs (drugs), and possession of paraphernalia; defendant acquitted of some drug counts.
- Following a retrial (first trial ended in a mistrial), Teran was convicted of manslaughter, two DUIs, and paraphernalia; he appealed challenging jury instructions and expert testimony.
- The Court of Appeals vacated and remanded the manslaughter conviction for instruction error but affirmed the remaining convictions.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Teran's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether court should sua sponte instruct jury that victim was not in a crosswalk | Instruction unnecessary; area was factual dispute for jury | Court should tell jury victim was not in a crosswalk | Refusal proper — would have been a comment on the facts; no error |
| Whether A.R.S. §§28‑792/793 right-of-way instructions should be given | Instructions not required; jury could decide duties from evidence and other instructions | Statutory right-of-way duties directly bear on recklessness/negligence and jury must be instructed | Court abused discretion by refusing; error was not harmless and requires reversal/remand on manslaughter count |
| Whether A.R.S. §28‑672 is a lesser-included offense of 2nd-degree murder | §28‑672 not a lesser because it includes an extra element (moving-violation) | §28‑672 should be instructed as a statutory lesser | Refusal correct — §28‑672 is not a lesser-included offense of homicide statutes |
| Admissibility of State experts: (a) reconstructionist speed opinion after mistrial (b) toxicologist impairment testimony | (a) No double-jeopardy bar because mistrial not caused by prosecutorial misconduct (b) Toxicologist may testify about levels if foundation laid; court vetted foundation | (a) Speed testimony violated double jeopardy (b) Toxicologist unqualified to opine on impairment; level evidence prejudicial | (a) No double-jeopardy error (b) Toxicologist was not qualified to opine on impairment and level testimony without foundation was erroneous, but defendant failed to contemporaneously object and did not show prejudice; conviction stands |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Felix, 237 Ariz. 280 (App. 2015) (view evidence in light most favorable to sustaining verdict)
- State ex rel. Montgomery v. Harris, 234 Ariz. 343 (2014) (carboxy-THC does not show impairment)
- State v. Rodriguez, 192 Ariz. 58 (1998) (trial court must not comment on facts; instructions must adequately set forth law)
- State v. Shumway, 137 Ariz. 585 (1983) (error to refuse instruction on victim's statutory duty to yield when evidence supports it)
- State v. Bible, 175 Ariz. 549 (1993) (harmless‑error standard for determining whether error contributed to verdict)
- State v. Thompson, 502 P.3d 437 (Ariz. 2022) (factors for admitting expert opinion under Rule 702)
- State v. Davolt, 207 Ariz. 191 (2004) (expert‑testimony admissibility principles)
- State v. Pike, 113 Ariz. 511 (1976) (jury resolves evidentiary conflicts)
- State v. Alemeida, 238 Ariz. 77 (App. 2015) (review instructions in light most favorable to proponent of requested instruction)