Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrss
≡ Menu

State v. Quovadis Conyice Evans, 2009AP889-CR, District I, 4/20/10

court of appeals decision (3-judge; not recommended for publication); for Evans: George Tauscheck; BiC: Resp.; Reply

Testimony from 4 (of a total of 9) false imprisonment victims wasn’t necessary to sustain the convictions on those counts:

… (A) reasonable jury could have determined beyond a reasonable doubt from circumstantial evidence that Nathan B., Nicholas B., Nigel B. and Rashod H. did not consent to being restrained by Evans. … Based on the testimony at trial, which described a dangerous and threatening situation in which the defendant bound or ordered bound the victims while holding a gun and threatened to kill the victims while they were restrained, the jury could well have inferred that Nicholas B., Rashod H., Nathan B. and Nigel B. did not consent to being restrained.

Facebooktwitterlinkedinmail
{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment