We defended a case not long ago where a municpal ordinance violation gave rise to a manslaughter case. He wasn't an immigrant, and he was convicted. It's a modification on the theory of the felony murder rules.
.
Mmm,,,that's what I'm talking about. How did you lose the case, what theory prevailed.?
..TM7
It was a case in which an unattended pitbull or two may have crossed a fence and killed an elderly lady. The theory of the case was that having an illegal dog was a dangerous condition and one the statute sought to avoid. The state had to prove that a) the dog killed the lady and b) the dog was a pitbull as defined in the statute and c) the dog was being owned, harbored, or controlled by the defendant.
a) The pathologist testified that the dog attack led to a fatal heart attack
b) The vet testified that it was one of the three dogs covered by the statute
c) There was testimony that the dog was fed and kept by the defendant
The first trial ended in a hung jury. The second ended in a conviction.
