Summary
The Supreme Court of Indiana reversed Santiago Perez's murder conviction and remanded for a new trial. The court held that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to an erroneous self-defense instruction that effectively allowed the jury to find murder based on the intentional use of a weapon without adequately requiring a knowing or intentional killing, and that the error prejudiced Perez.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to the jury instruction stating that a person who voluntarily enters combat with a deadly weapon and uses it resulting in death commits murder.
- Whether the erroneous jury instruction prejudiced Perez by eliminating the requirement that the State prove a knowing or intentional killing and by preventing consideration of lesser included offenses.
Holdings
- Trial counsel's failure to object to the incorrect self-defense jury instruction was deficient performance and could not be justified as trial strategy.
- Perez established prejudice because there was a reasonable probability that, absent the erroneous instruction, the jury could have reached a different result, including finding him guilty of a lesser included offense rather than murder.
Key quotations
“In effect, this instruction told the jury that intentional use of a weapon is murder.” (855)
“This did away entirely with the requirement of a "knowing or intentional killing."” (855)
Factual background
During a barroom altercation, Ignacio Soledad struck Derek Thomas and fled, after which Thomas and others pursued and assaulted Soledad. Perez testified that he attempted to ward off the attackers, drew a knife, and then fought Thomas one-on-one; Perez stabbed Thomas four times, three wounds being superficial, and Thomas later died from a wound to his aorta. Perez was convicted of murder and sentenced to sixty years.
Procedural history
Perez was convicted of murder in the trial court and sentenced to sixty years' imprisonment. On direct appeal, the Indiana Supreme Court concluded that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to an incorrect self-defense jury instruction, reversed the judgment, and remanded for a new trial.
Remand instructions
The judgment of the trial court was reversed and the case remanded for retrial.