State v. Haffner

242 A.3d 468

STATE

v.Nicholas HAFFNER.

No. 2018-21-C.A.

P2

12-216A

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

December 17, 2020

Christopher R. Bush, Department of Attorney General, for State.

Edward C. Roy, Jr., Esq., for Defendant.

Present: Suttell, C.J., Goldberg, Flaherty, and Robinson, JJ.

Justice Flaherty, for the Court.

On March 27, 2017, a Providence County Superior Court jury found the defendant, Nicholas Haffner, guilty of assault with a dangerous weapon, to wit, a shod foot, and driving while intoxicated. He was thereafter sentenced to a term of five years at the Adult Correctional Institutions, with eighteen months to serve and forty-two months suspended, with probation.

On appeal, defendant contends that the trial justice erred when she instructed the jury about the concept of aiding and abetting. He also argues that his so-called Frye hearing was conducted in error because the trial justice failed to include any discussion about aiding and abetting. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we affirm the judgment of the Superior Court.

IFacts and Travel

On January 24, 2012, defendant was charged by criminal information with one count of assault with a dangerous weapon, a shod foot, and one count of driving while intoxicated (DUI). A jury trial commenced on January 26, 2017, but a mistrial was declared on January 31, 2017.

A second jury trial began on March 21, 2017. Before the trial started, and because a plea offer had been made to defendant (which would have resulted in a disposition not requiring incarceration), the trial justice held a hearing to address the concerns raised in Missouri v. Frye , 566 U.S. 134, 132 S.Ct. 1399, 182 L.Ed.2d 379 (2012).¹ At the Frye hearing, the trial justice asked defendant if his lawyer had spoken with him about the elements of the charges that the state would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, and defendant responded, "Yes." The trial justice then specifically inquired about the charge of assault with a dangerous weapon as follows:

"THE COURT: [D]id your lawyer talk to you about the definition of Assault With a Dangerous Weapon, what has to be proven?

"THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

"THE COURT: And that a shod foot, when used in a certain manner, can indeed be considered a dangerous weapon?

"THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

"THE COURT: And would you like me to tell you specifically what those elements are or are you satisfied that [your attorney] has gone over it with you?

"[DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY]: Judge, I may add that we basically tried I would say approximately three quarters of this case before [a different trial justice]. Mr. Haffner stands before you this morning with the benefit of that experience, hearing the witnesses testify, for what it is worth.

"THE COURT: I'm aware of that. I want to make sure that whatever is done here doesn't come back and bite anybody.

"[DEFENDANT'S ATTORNEY]: Okay.

"THE COURT: In other words, I want to make sure he understands the elements of each of these counts and recommended amendments so that if he rejects the offer, because I will put it through as recommended, that he's making a knowing, voluntary and intelligent decision. You understand what I'm saying, sir?

"THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor.

"THE COURT: Do you need any information before you determine whether to accept the offer?

"THE DEFENDANT: No, your Honor.

"THE COURT: Okay. Is it my understanding that you wish to reject the offer?

"THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor."

After defendant rejected the state's offer, the trial began.

Vincent Gieck, Jr., the complaining witness, testified first. He said that at 11:30 p.m. on October 8, 2011, he had been at home with his girlfriend when he received a telephone call from a friend. In response to that call, he drove to the "sandpit," a location that he described as a clearing in the woods where young people frequently gathered for parties. He said that his then-girlfriend, Kayla Baumlin, accompanied him and that they arrived at the sandpit within ten to fifteen minutes after he received his friend's phone call.

He further testified that, when he arrived, he and Ms. Baumlin walked over to a fire at which approximately thirty people were gathered, some that he knew, and some that he did not know. He said that he saw his friend Nathan Rogler, who was bleeding from a wound to his head. Mr. Rogler told him that he had been hit in the head with a bottle, and, Mr. Gieck testified, he then became angry and asked, "Who threw the bottle? Where did it come from? What was it?" Mr. Gieck said that one individual responded by "[j]umping up and down, cussing and swearing and yelling [and] generally being aggressive." Mr. Gieck testified that the individual raised his hands up to his face and then "blows were exchanged" between he and that individual, with each man landing a few glancing punches on the other. He testified that at that point, numerous other people joined in the fight and that he "was approached by several other people who were also swinging and grappling."

Mr. Gieck testified that he was confronted by three or four males, all of whom were approximately his age, and that he "was eventually knocked down, or taken down to the ground," at which point he covered his "head to try to less[e]n some of the impact." Mr. Gieck testified that, when the man who had first fought with him, who also had been knocked to the ground, regained his footing, he joined the other men in the attack. Mr. Gieck testified that at that point, the first man was directly in front of him, "throwing fists and kicking as well." He testified that the man's fists and feet were hitting his head and face and that the man's feet were shod in light-duty work boots.

Mr. Gieck testified that he was on the ground for two to three minutes and that, in that time, he was kicked approximately a dozen times. He testified that eventually a young woman lay on top of him to try to protect him from the punching and kicking, and finally he was able to get back on his feet. He said that he then made his way out of the sandpit and that he and Ms. Baumlin drove to his parents’ home in Glocester, arriving there at approximately 3:30 or 4 a.m.

Mr. Gieck testified that his mother, who had been an army medic, dressed his wounds, and he went to sleep. He recounted that he went to the Burrillville police station the next morning around 10 a.m. and that he informed Officer Ryan Hughes about what had occurred the night before. Officer Hughes notified Mr. Gieck that there was a suspect in custody and he asked Mr. Gieck to view the suspect through a security monitor to see if he could identify the suspect as his assailant. Mr. Gieck testified that he viewed the suspect and identified him "as the individual that was attacking [him] at the sandpit."

Mr. Gieck said that, after he finished his interview with the police, he went to Rhode Island Hospital to have his injuries treated. Those injuries included cuts and lacerations around his head and elbows, a fractured front tooth, some minor bruising and bruised ribs, and bruises on his head, face, and back. He made a courtroom identification of defendant as the man whom he had viewed on the monitor at the police station. Mr. Gieck also identified defendant as the person who had repeatedly kicked and punched him.

Nathan Rogler was the next witness to testify. He testified that at around midnight on October 9, 2011, he was "off-roading" with a couple of friends near the power lines located between Burrillville and Glocester, when they came across a party. He described the party as a bonfire with music and approximately twenty-five to thirty people. He said that words were exchanged about the different high schools that he, his friends, and the partygoers had attended, when approximately three people started pushing and shoving him. He testified that he pushed somebody back and then that person smashed a bottle over his head. He recounted that, after he was hit with the bottle, other people began kicking and hitting him, but eventually he got away from the group. Mr. Rogler then said that he called Mr. Gieck and told him what had occurred and that he needed help.

He testified that Mr. Gieck told him on the telephone that he would come to the sandpit and that he arrived sometime later with his girlfriend, Ms. Baumlin. He testified that upon his arrival, Mr. Gieck asked Mr. Rogler who had hit him, and that soon a melee again broke out and punches were again thrown. He further testified that Mr. Gieck ended up on the ground, where he was punched and kicked by several people. Mr. Rogler said that he also ended up on the ground, but was nonetheless able to look up to see who was attacking Mr. Gieck. He described the assailants as three young white men, all approximately six feet tall. He added that eventually Mr. Gieck was able to scramble to his feet.

Mr. Rogler said that, after the fight, he and his friends drove to the home of Mr. Gieck's parents. He testified that the next day he went to the Burrillville police station and gave a statement to Officer Hughes. He also said that the police asked him to view a suspect who was in custody to see if he could identify him as one of the people who had been present the night before. Mr. Rogler testified that he recognized the suspect as one of those who had been hitting and kicking Mr. Gieck. He also made a courtroom identification of defendant as a person he had seen kicking Mr. Gieck.

Kathleen Wholey Rogler, another witness who attended the party, testified next and described a similar series of events.

She testified that, on October 9, 2011, at around midnight, she was at the power lines in Burrillville off-roading with friends when she saw a fire surrounded by numerous people, so they stopped to see who might be there. She said that at first things were friendly, but about half an hour later, someone smashed a bottle over Mr. Rogler's head and that he was bleeding. She said that Mr. Rogler then called Mr. Gieck, who arrived about twenty minutes...