Wyoming Supreme Court
James Bloomquist, Appellant (defendant) v. the State of Wyoming, Appellee (plaintiff)
April 3, 1996914 P.2d 812
Summary
The Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed Bloomquist’s aggravated vehicular homicide conviction. It held that admitting an accident-reconstruction officer’s videotaped deposition violated Bloomquist’s confrontation right because vacation plans did not establish witness unavailability, but the error was harmless because the testimony merely corroborated other evidence. The court rejected Bloomquist’s unanimity, ineffective-assistance, sentencing, sufficiency, and cumulative-error claims. No separate opinions were filed.
Holding
- Admission of Patrolman Dye’s videotaped deposition. The trial court abused its discretion and violated Bloomquist’s right to confront the witness by admitting Patrolman Dye’s videotaped deposition because the State did not show that it had been unable to procure his attendance through process or another reasonable means; however, the error was harmless.
- Unanimous verdict on alternative means. The general verdict did not violate Bloomquist’s right to a unanimous verdict because the State presented sufficient evidence to support both charged alternative means of aggravated vehicular homicide: driving while intoxicated and driving recklessly.
- Ineffective assistance based on failure to investigate and call an expert. Counsel was not ineffective for failing to obtain an accident-reconstruction expert because Bloomquist did not show that an available expert would have supported his theory, and he could not establish prejudice.
- Ineffective assistance based on investigation, suppression, instructions, and lesser-included offense. Bloomquist failed to prove deficient performance or prejudice from counsel’s preparation decisions, failure to seek suppression of his statements, failure to object to the instructions, or failure to request a lesser-included-offense instruction.
- Sentencing and proportionality. The sentencing proceeding did not violate due process, Rule 32, or constitutional proportionality protections, and the twelve-to-fourteen-year sentence was within the trial court’s discretion and statutory limits.
- Sufficiency of the evidence and cumulative error. The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Bloomquist’s conduct proximately caused the victim’s death, and the cumulative-error claim failed because the only trial error was harmless.
Docket 95-65
Cited authorities
- Wyoming Rule of Criminal Procedure 32
- Rule 804(a)
Cited by
- Luke Edward Mickelson, (defendant) v. the State of Wyoming, (plaintiff)
- Richard Allen Tucker, Appellant (defendant) v. the State of Wyoming, Appellee (plaintiff)
- Jeffrey Allen Metzer, (Defendant) v. the State of Wyoming, (Plaintiff).
- Cody Lee Edwards, (defendant) v. the State of Wyoming, (plaintiff)
- State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent v. N.i.
- James Lancaster, Appellant (defendant) v. the State of Wyoming, Appellee (plaintiff)
- State of Hawai'I, Petitioner-Appellee v. Willie Jones, Also Known as “willis,” Respondent-Appellant
- State of Hawai'I, Petitioner-Appellee v. Willie Jones, Also Known as “willis,” Respondent-Appellant