Marissa Meyer

(2/28/19)

Class 20 Criminal Law Case Briefs

Girouard v. State
Maryland Court of Appeals
583 A.2d 718 (1991)

 Rule of Law
o For provocation to be adequate to mitigate murder to manslaughter, the
provocation must be calculated to inflame the passion of a reasonable person
and tend to cause him to act for the moment from passion rather than reason.
 Facts
o Steven Girouard (defendant) and his wife Joyce had been married for about two
months when they got into a heated argument.
o During the argument Joyce, who was just over five feet tall and weighed 115
pounds, repeatedly insulted Steven, who was over six feet tall and weighed over
200 pounds.
o Joyce told Steven she did not love him and had never wanted to marry him, and
she demanded a divorce.
o Joyce also informed Steven that she had filed charges against him for abuse with
his commanding officer in the Army and told him he would probably be court-
martialed.
o Steven lunged at Joyce with a kitchen knife and stabbed her 19 times, killing her.
o Steven was immediately distraught at what he had done.
o When the police arrived, they found Steven wandering around outside his
apartment building stating that he could not believe what he had done.
 Procedural History
o At trial, a psychologist testified that Steven had mental issues including an
inability to understand his own capacity to express hostility and a need for
acceptance and love.
o Steven was convicted of second-degree murder.
o He appealed, arguing that Joyce’s provocation should mitigate his murder
conviction to manslaughter.
 Issue
o For provocation to be adequate to mitigate murder to manslaughter, must the
provocation be calculated to inflame the passion of a reasonable person and
tend to cause him to act for the moment from passion rather than reason?
 Holding and Reasoning (Cole, J.)
o Yes. Voluntary manslaughter is an intentional homicide committed in a sudden
heat of passion, caused by adequate provocation, before a reasonable
opportunity for the passion to cool.

1
o Some factors may mitigate murder to manslaughter because they constitute
adequate provocation.
o For provocation to be adequate to mitigate murder to manslaughter, the
provocation must be calculated to inflame the passion of a reasonable person
and tend to cause him to act for the moment from passion rather than reason.
o Under the reasonable-person standard, the defendant's individual mental issues
may not be taken into account in determining whether provocation was
adequate.
o Traditionally, factors constituting adequate provocation have included only
extreme assault or battery upon the defendant, mutual fighting, the defendant’s
illegal arrest, injury or serious abuse of a close relative of the defendant, or the
sudden discovery of a spouse’s adultery.
o In general, words alone are not adequate provocation, although words may be
sufficient if accompanied by conduct that demonstrates the intention and ability
to cause bodily harm to the defendant.
o In this case, although Joyce provoked Steven, the provocation was insufficient to
cause a reasonable man to stab his provoker 19 times.
o Under the reasonable-person standard, Steven's unique mental issues are
irrelevant to whether the provocation was adequate.
o Furthermore, even assuming that words may constitute adequate provocation if
accompanied by the intent and ability to cause the defendant physical harm, the
size disparity between Joyce and Steven indicates that she did not have the
ability to harm him.
o It cannot be the case that one spouse may kill the other to end a verbal dispute
and be convicted only of manslaughter.
o The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

2
 Maher v. People
Michigan Supreme Court
81 Am. Dec. 781 (1862)

 Rule of Law
o A criminal charge of murder may be reduced to manslaughter if the intentional
killing is committed in the heat of passion produced by a reasonable provocation
before a reasonable time has lapsed for the passion to cool.
 Facts
o Maher (defendant), believing that his wife and Patrick Hunt were having an
affair, followed the pair as they entered the woods together.
o When Hunt and his wife returned a half hour later, Maher followed Hunt to a
saloon.
o Just prior to entering the saloon, a friend told Maher that his wife and Hunt had
sexual intercourse the day before.
o Maher entered the saloon, approached Hunt, said something unintelligible to
him, and shot him in the left ear.
 Procedural History
o Maher was charged with assault with intent to kill.
o At trial, the judge refused to allow evidence of the facts leading up to the
shooting as tending to show proof of provocation.
o Maher was found guilty and he appealed.
 Issue
o May a criminal charge of murder be reduced to manslaughter if the intentional
killing is committed in the heat of passion produced by a reasonable provocation
before a reasonable time has lapsed for the passion to cool?
 Holding and Reasoning (Christiancy, J.)
o Yes. Maher argues that the evidence of the interaction between his wife and
Hunt as well as the discussion with his friend prior to entering the saloon was
improperly rejected.
o Was the evidence properly excluded? The answer depends on whether the
evidence would have reduced a charge of murder to manslaughter, had Maher
killed Hunt.
o If the homicide would have been found to be manslaughter, then Maher could
not be guilty of assault with intent to murder, but only of simple assault and
battery.
o Murder is often committed with some degree of coolness and deliberation and
prompted by a wicked, depraved, or malignant mind.
o However, if the act of killing is intentional, but done so in the heat of passion
produced by some reasonable provocation and before a reasonable time has
elapsed for the passion and reason to cool, then murder is deemed to be
manslaughter.
o What is sufficient provocation? The general rule is that, at the time of the act,
reason should be disturbed or obscured by passion to an extent which might

3
 render average men to act without reflection and from passion rather than
judgment.
o But simply because a state of excitement has followed from an act will not
render it sufficient provocation.
o The “average man” standard will be utilized to determine whether provocation
is sufficient in any given case unless the defendant has some specific weakness
of mind and shall be left to a jury to determine.
o What amount of time to “cool down” is required? Naturally, the situation will
depend on the facts of a given case and should equally be left to the jury to
determine.
o A trial court may define to the jury the principles upon which the question is to
be decided, and leave them to determine whether the time was reasonable
under all the circumstances.
o Here, the facts indicate sufficient provocation that should have been sent to the
jury to decide.
o The judgment of conviction is reversed and the matter is remanded for a new
trial.
 Dissent (Manning, J.)
o The evidence was properly excluded.
o The cause of the provocation itself must be given in the presence of the
defendant committing the homicide.
o It would be very mischievous to let passion engendered by something one has
heard enter into and determine the nature of the crime committed.