Court Summaries
| Publication year | 2017 |
| Pages | 46 |
Anna Reeves Olson Park Street Law Offices Casper, Wyoming
Brittany Brown v. The State of Wyoming
2017 WY 45
S-16-0163
May 1, 2017
After a juvenile delinquency proceeding concerning Brittany Brown’s child, the DA fled a motion for an order to show cause why she should not be held in criminal contempt. The DA alleged that Ms. Brown failed to check in weekly with the juvenile’s probation officer and cooperate with the juvenile probation office “in all respects.”
The district court issued an order to show cause. Ms. Brown fled a motion to dismiss based upon a lack of due process and a motion for access to her child’s confidential juvenile file. The district court denied Ms. Brown’s motions and she entered a conditional no contest plea.
On appeal, the Supreme Court found that Ms. Brown had not entered a proper conditional plea but the Court decided to convert her appeal into a writ of review so that it could consider the issues. The Court then reversed and held that Ms. Brown had been deprived of due process because the order to show cause did not state the essential facts underlying her criminal contempt charge. As Ms. Brown could not determine which provisions she had allegedly violated, she was deprived of due process. The Court also ruled that the deficiencies in her case were compounded by the district court’s denial of her motion for access to the juvenile file. Ms. Brown’s attorney could not defectively represent her without access to her file and, therefore, the case was reversed.
Anthony Haire v. State
2017 WY 48
S-16-0187
May 8, 2017
In April 2015, Anthony Haire was grilling hamburgers in front of his mobile home with his family and friends. Several hours later a fight broke out between Haire and one of his neighbors, Jamye SoRelle. At one point, SoRelle shot his revolver into the ground near Haire’s wife. Haire then ran to his car to retrieve his pistol and eventually shot and killed SoRelle.
Haire was charged with involuntary manslaughter. At trial, Haire argued that he killed SoRelle in self-defense and proposed a “castle doctrine” instruction claiming that he had an absolute right to stand his ground and was under no obligation to retreat, but the district court rejected that instruction. Haire was convicted and appealed.
The Supreme Court held that the district court did not err in refusing to give the castle doctrine instruction because the shooting occurred in a common parking area, which was outside the scope of Haire’s home. However, the Supreme Court did find that the district court committed plain error when it gave an instruction that informed the jury that Haire had a duty to retreat before using deadly force. The Supreme Court held that a person only has a duty to pursue reasonable alternatives prior to using deadly force and one of those reasonable alternatives may be the duty to retreat, but there is no absolute duty to retreat. Rather...
To continue reading
Request your trial