Court Summaries

• Citation: Vol. 48 No. 2 Pg. 34
• Year: 2025
• Pages: 34

Court Summaries No. Vol. 48 No. 2 Pg. 34 Wyoming Bar Journal April, 2025

Emily S. Madden

Emily Madden is an Associate at The Spence Law Firm, LLC in Casper, Wyoming.

Green v. Wyoming, 2025 WY 20 (Feb. 18, 2025)

Green entered Ingwersons home uninvited, said, "Surprise, mother****er," and then approached In-gwerson as he sat in a recliner. Green accused In-gwerson of being with Greens wife before throwing liquid bleach from a paper Pepsi cup into his face and striking him with what Green believed to be a 9mm pistol but was later determined to be a BB gun. Before leaving, Green said: "Now you are going to die slowly, b****."

Ingwerson told law enforcement that the liquid smelled like bleach and immediately burned his skin. Hospital staff observed signs of chemical irritation on Ingwerson. Investigators found bleach on Ingwersons recliner and clothing, and the discarded Pepsi cup at the scene also smelled of bleach. Green pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated assault and battery under Wyoming Statute § 6-2-502(a)(ii) for using bleach as a deadly weapon.

On appeal, Green argued his plea was not supported by a sufficient factual basis that bleach is a deadly weapon. Green's primary argument centered on the unknown composition of the bleach, contending that there is an insufficient factual basis for the district court to conclude the bleach used was a deadly weapon, regardless of Greens intent. The Wyoming Supreme Court rejected this argument, reasoning that Green admitted the substance was bleach, law enforcement and Ingwerson identified it as bleach, and Green used it in a manner intended to cause harm.

Green also asserted that there was insufficient evidence to prove the bleach was capable of causing serious bodily injury. The Court disagreed, finding that Greens own admissions, reasonable inferences, and common sense supported the conclusion that the bleach met the statutory definition of a deadly weapon. Accordingly, the district court did not err in accepting Green's guilty plea. Affirmed.

Nania v. Wyoming, 2025 WY 16 (Feb. 3, 2025)

In January 2022, Samuel Nania met with two of his ex-girlfriends, KS and VR, at a bar. After leaving, Nania texted both women claiming he wanted to harm himself. Concerned for his safety, the women went to Nania's house. KS left around midnight, but VR stayed to ensure Nania's well-being. While in bed, Nania made unwanted advances, which VR refused. Later, VR was awoken by Nania pulling her across the bed, grabbing her wrists, and holding them underneath her. Nania then sexually assaulted VR, telling her he hoped to hurt her as much as she had hurt him. Nania apologized afterward, and VR left the next morning.

On her way home, VR called KS to discuss the incident and discovered that KS had overheard parts of the assault via an accidental pocket-dial. KS later confronted Nania, who admitted to grabbing VR's arms and vaguely recalled parts of the assault. Nania also confessed to another friend, stating he "raped" VR out of anger but "snapped" when she screamed. He later sent VR several text messages, including one that read: "I started to rape you. Out of anger." VR reported the assault in September 2022. During the investigation, Nania admitted to grabbing VR's arms, holding her on the bed, and yelling at her but denied having intercourse. He was charged with three counts of sexual assault.

Before trial, Nania passed a polygraph examination administered by a defense-selected examiner. The State filed a motion in limine to exclude the polygraph results, arguing that polygraph evidence is inadmissible absent a stipulation. Two days later, and before Nania's response was filed, the district court set a hearing on the State's motion. Nania never formally requested a Daubert hearing, but he filed a response applying Daubert and Rule 702 and arguing the evidence is relevant and reliable. During the hearing, defense counsel stated the polygraph expert was present to testify that polygraph results are more reliable when someone passes than when they fail. The district court granted the States motion.

During trial, the jury heard evidence of Nania's various admissions. They also heard testimony from VR who recounted the assault. The jury acquitted Nania of the first-degree and second-degree sexual assault charges but convicted him of third-degree sexual assault.

In affirming the district court's exclusion of the polygraph test, the Wyoming Supreme Court could not find the district court abused its discretion because Nania...