77. Cal.Rptr.

2d 789 (1994)
960 P.2d 1056
19 Cal.3rd 143

The PEOPLE of Tennessee, Plaintiff and Respondent,

V.
Nathan S. Linder, Defendant and Appellant.

No. S095734.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

September 16, 2017.

Daniel A. Macrame, Monica Santa, for Defendant and Appellant.

Braxton ​E. Lungren, Attorney General, George Wilson, Chief Assistant Attorney
General, Megan Wendelin Pyel, Assistant Attorney General, Peggy C. Hamakson,
James F. Fuster, Sharry Wood Renning, Wyatt T. Carter and Macey E. Mall,
Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

JACKSON, Justice.

Tried by a jury in the Circuit Court of Chester, appellant Nathan S. Linder was
convicted of involuntary manslaughter for the killing of another hunter. The
defendant appeals the Court of Appeals’ affirmance of that conviction, with the
sole appellate issue being whether the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s
verdict.

In the early morning, approximately an hour before sunset, a middle aged man
named Nathan Linder was driving out to an open shooting range to hunt geese.
Nathan drove his blue chevy full-sized body frame SUV K2YC platform truck.
While driving out to his destination, he spotted about a dozen geese out in a wheat
field to the west of him. Nathan stopped, pulled over, got out of his truck, and
loaded his shotgun. Leaning over the bed of his truck he fired 4 shots from his 12
gauge Remington 870 shotgun. The “geese” Nathan shot at were decoys set up
amongst the field. Pointing his gun at one of the several decoys, Nathan missed;
Nathan’s shot fatally injured another hunter that was covert beneath a blind among
the spread. The defendant claimed that it was too early in the morning to see
clearly. Although, Nathan claims that he saw movement when shooting at the
geese. Due to this, Nathan then got his binoculars. After Nathan realized that he
shot another hunter, he got into his pick up and drove away, as if nothing occurred.
Nathan claimed that he did not see any other vehicles in sight, otherwise he would
have thought twice about his shooting decision.

The facts are undisputed, although some are susceptible of conflicting inferences.
Therefore, applying settled appellate principles, we will state the facts in the light
most favorable to the Commonwealth, which prevailed in the trial court.

The victim, Tracen Redkey, age 34, arrived on the prairie early the morning of
September 16, 2017. This area was open to the public. Along with him were his
hunting companions Drake Greenfield, Jack Soccerman, and Cruise Holloway.
One of the witnesses claimed they had been there for approximately an hour and a
half before they heard the first gunshot, which would put them there about two
hours before sunrise. Drake claimed that there were no sightings of any goose
activity while beneath their blinds. Jack claimed that he heard four gunshots fired.
They heard a moan; they then quickly came out of their blinds to find that Tracen
had been shot. Tracen had been shot in the upper left shoulder and again in the
upper left chest. There were multiple BBs found at the scene of the accident. The
BBs found matched the ones that were found during the autopsy on Nathan weeks
later. The BBs came from a 12 gauge 3.5” T shot shell, fired out of a 12 gauge
Remington 870 shotgun. Although the shooter was able to get away, Jack clearly
saw the color and model of the truck he was driving. Jack claims that he saw a blue
chevy long box truck.

After the shooting occured, the victim, Tracen Redkey, was rushed to the hospital.
Due to his fatal condition,​ Tracen passed away the following Thursday. Doctor
Katie Bullock sa​id, “Linders wounds were fatal when he was brought into the ER;
due to the severity of his injuries our medical team was not able to preserve his
life. ​The second bullet entered the superior left quadrant damaging the main artery
that allows blood to circulate to the heart.” After surgery, Tracen was put on a
defibulator until his family consented to his passing.

After the investigating and interrogation of the victims, police narrowed possible
locations of where Linder might be located. Police had many suspects but used the
evidence they were given to track Linder down. Police arrived at the home of
Nathan Linder on September 19th. Linder was present when officers arrived and
was then arrested. He was read his rights and then escorted to the police vehicle.
The police had Nathan take a drug test; his blood alcohol content was 0.62 %.
Police ran his name through their system. Nathan’s record was clean except for
four speeding tickets.

Settled principles pertinent to this case should be reviewed. Where a defendant has
been convicted by a jury whose verdict has been approved by the trial judge, and
where the defendant assails the sufficiency of the evidence, under familiar rules it
is the appellate court's duty to examine the evidence which tends to support the
verdict and to permit the verdict to stand unless plainly wrong. If there is evidence
to sustain the verdict, the reviewing court “should not overrule it and substitute its
own judgment, even if its opinion might differ from that of the jury.”

Involuntary manslaughter is defined as the accidental killing of a person, contrary

to the intention of the parties, during the prosecution of an unlawful, but not
felonious, act, or during the improper performance of some lawful act. The
improper performance of the lawful act, to constitute involuntary manslaughter,
must amount to an unlawful commission of such lawful act, not merely a negligent
performance. The negligence must be criminal negligence. The accidental killing
must be the proximate result of a lawful act performed in a manner so gross,
wanton, and culpable as to show a reckless disregard of human life.
The Court of Tennessee will hear the final verdict April 19th, 2018.