A perfect example of why it is very important to know your elements and how they apply in your case.
A11-1314 State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Christopher James Hayes, Appellant.
1. To commit the criminal offense of drive-by shooting, a person must, while in or having just exited a motor vehicle, recklessly discharge a firearm at or toward another motor vehicle or a building. Minn. Stat. § 609.66, subd. 1e(a) (2012).
2. An individual who discharges a firearm at or toward an occupied building, an occupied motor vehicle, or a person is eligible for an enhanced sentence, Minn. Stat. § 609.66, subd. 1e(b) (2012), but only if the individual has committed the criminal offense of drive-by shooting, as defined in Minn. Stat. § 609.66, subd. 1e(a).
3. The record contains insufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict that the appellant was guilty of the offense of first-degree felony murder while committing a drive-by shooting because there is no evidence in the record that the appellant recklessly fired at or toward another motor vehicle or a building while committing the homicide.
4. The district court did not commit plain error by admitting testimony that a witness was threatened and attacked for being a “snitch.”
Reversed and remanded. Justice David R. Stras.
Took no part, Justice Wilhelmina M. Wright.
By: Landon J. Ascheman, Esq.
(B) 612.217.0077 (C) 651.280.9533 (F) 651.344.0700