Caseflicks

Supreme Court of Colorado • 1964

People v. La Voie

395 P.2d 1001 | 155 Colo. 551 | 1964 Colo. LEXIS 383

Full access

Unlock the video and quiz

The written brief is free to read below. Subscribe to watch the video explainer and take the quiz.

Create an account Log in

Takeaway

In short, this case confirms that a court may direct an acquittal when undisputed evidence establishes self-defense and leaves no legally sufficient basis for a jury to convict.

Background

After finishing his late-night shift as a pharmacist, La Voie drove home on West Colfax Avenue. A car carrying four intoxicated men deliberately rammed the rear of his car and pushed it forward through a red light “for kicks.” Although La Voie applied his brakes, the force from behind drove his car forward, leaving skid marks.

When the vehicles stopped, La Voie placed his permitted revolver in his belt and got out. The four men exited their car, approached him, threatened to make him eat the gun and to “mop up the street” with him, and used profane language. One man advanced ahead of the others in a menacing manner. La Voie shot that man, who died at the scene.

La Voie was charged with murder and pleaded not guilty. After hearing testimony from eighteen witnesses, including thirteen prosecution witnesses, the Jefferson County district court directed a verdict of not guilty. It concluded that the evidence established justifiable homicide and left no issue for the jury. The district attorney sought review, asking the Colorado Supreme Court to disapprove that ruling.

Issues

Issue #1

Whether the trial court properly directed a verdict of not guilty rather than submitting the murder charge to the jury.

Holding

Yes. The evidence furnished no factual issue that could support a conviction, so the trial court properly directed an acquittal.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court reviewed the entire record, including testimony from eighteen witnesses, and found no evidence that warranted submitting any issue to the jury. The trial court had concluded that the evidence established a clear case of justifiable homicide, and the Supreme Court agreed.

Relying on People v. Urso, the Court explained that a trial judge may prevent an unsupported verdict from coming into existence. If the evidence is insufficient or incapable of convincing a reasonable jury beyond a reasonable doubt, the judge may direct a verdict rather than permit a jury to reach a result unsupported by competent legal evidence. This authority protects against a miscarriage of justice before, as well as after, a verdict.

Issue #2

Whether La Voie's shooting was legally justified as self-defense.

Holding

Yes. La Voie reasonably believed that he faced an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm and was entitled to use deadly force to defend himself.

Reasoning

Under Young v. People, a person may act in self-defense when he reasonably believes, and actually believes, that death or great bodily harm is imminent. The right applies even if later events show that the apparent danger was not real or that the defender misjudged its extent.

La Voie was a stranger to the four men and had been peaceably driving home from work. The men had deliberately used their car to ram and propel his vehicle, then emerged in a group, threatened him, and advanced toward him. On those undisputed facts, their conduct gave La Voie reasonable grounds to believe that he faced a threatened assault capable of causing grave harm.

Because the record established justification rather than criminal homicide, the killing resulted from the assailants' lawless conduct and disregard for La Voie's rights. No evidentiary basis remained for a jury to reject self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.