State of Maine v. Christopher Saenz ( 2016 )

MAINE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT Reporter of Decisions
Decision: 2016 ME 159 Docket: Han-15-452
Argued: September 14, 2016
Decided: October 25, 2016
Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, and HUMPHREY, JJ.
STATE OF MAINE
v.
CHRISTOPHER SAENZ
SAUFLEY, C.J.
[¶1] Hilary Saenz died in her Ellsworth home on Christmas Day, 2013,
after several days of beatings and injuries inflicted on her by her husband
while her children were present. The immediate cause of her death was a
subdural hematoma, a brain bleed that caused her to lose consciousness and
die. Her husband, Christopher Saenz, was charged with her murder, and,
following a jury-waived trial in the Superior Court (Hancock County,
A. Murray, J.), convicted of depraved indifference murder, 17-A M.R.S.
§ 201(1)(B) (2015). He appeals, arguing that there was insufficient evidence
for the court to have found beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) his actions
caused his wife’s death, and (2) he acted with a depraved indifference to the
2
value of human life. See id.; State v. Erskine, 2006 ME 5, ¶ 9, 889 A.2d 312. We
affirm the judgment.
I. BACKGROUND
[¶2] Because Saenz challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, we
summarize the trial court’s extensive, supported factual findings in detail.
[¶3] In November and December 2013, Hilary Saenz and Christopher
Saenz were living together with their twelve-year-old daughter and
eight-year-old son. In November 2013, Saenz expressed suspicion that his
wife was cheating on him after he borrowed her telephone and did not
recognize some of the telephone numbers in the call history. In the weeks
leading up to Christmas 2013, Saenz argued with his wife about the numbers
on her telephone four or five days per week.
[¶4] Saenz physically assaulted his wife during many of these
arguments. Over the course of December 22 through December 24, Saenz
grabbed Hilary’s arms, pushed her away, and smacked her face, causing a
black eye. He also punched her legs, punched her arm, pushed her, held her
down on a chair with his knee in her stomach, and squeezed her hand so
tightly it bent the ring on her finger. On December 23, Saenz punched Hilary
in the forehead during an argument in front of their son.
3
[¶5] On December 24, the daughter observed bruising near her
mother’s eyebrow, cheekbone, and nose. Saenz admitted to his daughter that
he had punched her mother in the face. He promised her that he would not do
it again. That night, the daughter woke up in the middle of the night and saw
Saenz pin her mother on the couch and hold her hands back.
[¶6] In the early morning of December 25, a neighbor who lived
diagonally across the street awoke to loud banging and profanity. He looked
outside to see Saenz slamming the apartment door repeatedly and yelling
back toward the inside of the apartment.
[¶7] After the children opened presents on Christmas morning, Saenz
again argued with Hilary about the unknown calls and texts on her telephone.
The daughter told Saenz to stop fighting because it was Christmas, and he said
that he would try.
[¶8] Saenz and his wife then took a nap in their bedroom. After they
woke up from the nap, they resumed arguing in the living room and then went
into their bedroom and closed the door.
[¶9] The daughter initially heard shouting from the bedroom, then she
could not hear arguing any more. Saenz came out of the bedroom, went into
the daughter’s room and took her telephone. Later, Saenz told the daughter
4
and son to go to the neighbor’s home because he was going to call an
ambulance. The daughter testified that Saenz told her their mother had
“passed out.”
[¶10] At 2:13 p.m., Saenz performed an internet search for “What do
you do when someone gets knocked out.” Eight minutes later, he performed
another search and reviewed an article titled “Helping a Person During an
Epileptic Seizure.” Saenz called the local hospital seven minutes after this
search and the charge nurse told him to call 9-1-1. After he had called and
texted his mother several times over the next ten minutes, Saenz dialed 9-1-1,
but the call never connected. Shortly thereafter, Saenz spoke with his mother
on the telephone for just under three minutes. More than half an hour after
Saenz’s initial web search, he again called 9-1-1, and an ambulance arrived a
few minutes later. The court heard testimony that soon after the ambulance
arrived, Hilary’s pulse stopped, and although rescue personnel performed CPR
for more than half an hour, until 3:33 p.m., they could not resuscitate her, and
Hilary died at her home.
[¶11] The cause of Hilary’s death was blunt force trauma to her head
and torso. These traumas caused a subdural hematoma and a lacerated liver,
which were the fatal injuries. The immediate cause of her death was the
5
subdural hematoma. The lacerated liver was a potentially fatal injury, but it,
alone, would not have caused Hilary’s death on the day she died.
[¶12] At the time of her death, Hilary had more than fifty visible,
external bruises on her body, including at least fifteen bruises on her head.
Among these were injuries to her forehead, chin, and right eye that were
hours or days old, and there was a bruise to her abdomen that was days old.
She also had multiple internal bruises.
[¶13] Several of Hilary’s bruises were caused by multiple injuries that
occurred at different times. Her left temple had both an older injury and an
injury that was only minutes or hours old. There were bruises to the top of
Hilary’s skull and to her right temple that were caused by older injuries as
well as injuries that were hours old.
[¶14] Saenz gave a variety of accounts of the events leading up to his
wife’s death. When he called the hospital, he told the receptionist that his
“buddy” had hit his head after falling on ice and was having a seizure. Saenz
told the ambulance personnel that his wife was dizzy, fell and hit her head on
the bed, and had a seizure. He also made statements that she had hit her head
on the mattress, that she had hit her head on the floor, that she “might” have
fallen, that it might have been a reaction to medication, that she had recently
6
changed medications, and that she and his ex-girlfriend had recently gotten
into a fight.
[¶15] Two days after his wife’s death, Saenz was arrested for her
murder, and he was later charged, by a single-count indictment, with
intentional or knowing murder, 17-A M.R.S § 201(1)(A) (2015), or, in the
alternative, depraved indifference murder, 17-A M.R.S. § 201(1)(B). The court
held a jury-waived trial from May 18 to May 28, 2015, during which it heard
testimony from the children, rescue personnel, police officers, neighbors,
friends, coworkers, and competing medical experts.
[¶16] The court heard specific testimony from the medical examiner
that a punch to the head could cause a subdural hematoma and that the risk
increases with multiple blows.
[¶17] As part of his alternative argument that Hilary’s death was
brought about by a “spontaneous” seizure1 that caused her to fall and strike
her head, Saenz offered expert testimony that Hilary’s subdural hematoma
was unlikely to have been caused by a punch. Saenz introduced evidence that
his wife had sustained head injuries from a motor vehicle accident and from a
fall on ice, years earlier, in support of this explanation. However, the court
1 In other words, a seizure not caused by Saenz’s beatings.
7
also heard testimony that Hilary had never been diagnosed with a seizure
disorder and had denied ever having had a seizure when asked by medical
personnel on at least four occasions. There was additional testimony that
after his wife’s death, Saenz told at least three people that she had never had a
seizure before the day she died.
[¶18] Based on the evidence presented, the court found that the State
had proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Saenz caused Hilary’s death by
inflicting blunt force trauma to her head within the thirty-six hours before her
death and that this trauma either directly caused the subdural hematoma or
caused her to fall and strike the floor with the same result. The court further
found that the physical violence Saenz inflicted on his wife in the days leading
up to her death and the delay in seeking medical assistance amounted to a
depraved indifference to the value of human life.
[¶19] In accordance with these findings, the court found Saenz guilty of
depraved indifference murder, entered a judgment of conviction, and
sentenced him to forty-seven years’ imprisonment. Saenz was thirty-two
years old at the time of sentencing. Hilary was twenty-nine years old when
she died.
[¶20] Saenz timely appealed from the conviction.
8
II. DISCUSSION
[¶21] Saenz does not dispute the court’s findings that he repeatedly
beat his wife over the course of multiple days, inflicting head-to-toe bruising
and internal injuries. He argues, however, that those assaults did not cause
the fatal injury. Saenz argues that there was insufficient evidence for the
court to have found that he caused his wife’s death because his experts
testified that it is unlikely for a punch to the head to cause a subdural
hematoma. He urges us to conclude that the court should have accepted the
testimony of his experts that a spontaneous seizure and resulting fall was the
most likely cause of the subdural hematoma. Further, Saenz argues that there
was insufficient evidence for the court to find that he acted with depraved
indifference to the value of human life.
[¶22] “When a criminal defendant contends that the evidence was
insufficient to support the conviction, we view the evidence in the light most
favorable to the State to determine whether the trier of fact rationally could
have found beyond a reasonable doubt every element of the offense charged.”
Erskine, 2006 ME 5, ¶ 9, 889 A.2d 312 (quotation marks omitted). “It is the
prerogative of the fact-finder to resolve conflicting issues of fact,” and thus
“[w]e defer to all credibility determinations made by the fact-finder.” State v.
9
Hodsdon, 2016 ME 46, ¶ 8, 135 A.3d 816 (quotation marks omitted).
“[F]actual findings may be supported by reasonable inferences drawn from all
the circumstances even if those inferences are contradicted by parts of the
direct evidence.” State v. Stinson, 2000 ME 87, ¶ 8, 751 A.2d 1011.
[¶23] The Legislature has established that a “person is guilty of murder
if the person . . . [e]ngages in conduct that manifests a depraved indifference
to the value of human life and that in fact causes the death of another human
being.” 17-A M.R.S. § 201(1)(B). “[A] verdict of guilty of depraved
indifference murder is appropriate where the accused’s conduct, objectively
viewed, created such a high tendency to produce death that the law attributes
to him the highest degree of blameworthiness.” State v. Crocker, 435 A.2d 58,
63 (Me. 1981) (quotation marks omitted); see also State v. Witham, 2005 ME
79, ¶ 8, 876 A.2d 40. In order for a fact-finder to find an accused person guilty
of depraved indifference murder, the adjudicator must conclude that the
defendant “consciously . . . engaged in conduct that he should have known
would create a very high degree of risk of death or serious bodily injury and it
must also under the circumstances [have been] unjustifiable for him to take
the risk.” Crocker, 435 A.2d at 63 (quotation marks omitted). “Put differently,
death-producing conduct will justify a verdict of guilty of depraved
10
indifference murder if a jury could find that that conduct was so heinous in
the eyes of the law as to constitute murder.” Id. (quotation marks omitted).
[¶24] The evidence here was more than sufficient for the court
rationally to have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Saenz inflicted blunt
impact trauma on Hilary’s head that caused the fatal subdural hematoma
either directly or by causing a fatal fall. Contrary to Saenz’s assertions, the
State presented competent evidence at trial to demonstrate that it is possible
for blunt force trauma, such as a blow to the head, to cause a subdural
hematoma. The court could both reject the opinions of Saenz’s experts that
subdural hematomas are not commonly caused by blows to the head, or it
could accept those opinions but nevertheless find that Hilary’s subdural
hematoma was caused by such a blow in this case. The court was thus free to
reject Saenz’s alternative explanation that the subdural hematoma resulted
from an unrelated fall caused by a spontaneous seizure.
[¶25] Ultimately, the evidence of his unrelenting and horrific abuse of
Hilary over hours and days, including multiple blows to her head resulting in
her death, along with his delay in seeking medical assistance, fully support the
court’s findings that Saenz killed his wife and that he acted with a depraved
indifference to the value of human life in doing so.
11
The entry is:
Judgment affirmed.
On the briefs:
Robert Van Horn, Esq., Ellsworth, and Jeffrey C. Toothaker,
Esq., Ellsworth, for appellant Christopher Saenz
Janet T. Mills, Attorney General, and Lara M. Nomani, Asst.
Atty. Gen., Office of the Attorney General, Augusta, for
appellee State of Maine
At oral argument:
Robert Van Horn, Esq., for appellant Christopher Saenz
Lara M. Nomani, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee State of Maine
Hancock County Unified Criminal Docket docket number CR-2013-529
FOR CLERK REFERENCE ONLY