2012-82 State v. Javier Merida (show cause)
The applicant appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief. The applicant argues that the Superior Court judge erred in denying his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The applicant argues that his trial counsel in the underlying sexual molestation trial failed to cross-examine key witnesses on the complaining witness’s motive to lie; failed to call a medical witness; prevented him from testifying during the trial; and failed to object to the order of testimony at trial.
2012-129 Alexander Rose v. State (full briefing)
The petitioner appeals from the denial of his application for postconviction relief and petition for habeas corpus. The petitioner argues that the state erred in calculating the expiration date for his probation. The petitioner contends that his probation period began to run once he was released from incarceration due to credit for time served awaiting trial, good time credits, and parole.
2012-60 State v. Jaimeson Rushlow (show cause)
Defendant appeals pro se from the denial of his motion to restore property. Defendant was charged with larceny and domestic assault and the charges were later dismissed by the state. Defendant contends that the hearing judge erred in denying his motion to restore property because the state failed to present any evidence that he was not entitled to the return of the cash seized from him at the time of his arrest.
2012-5 State v. Christopher Thornton (show cause)
The defendant appeals pro se from the denial of several postconviction motions (including a motion for a new trial), challenging on several counts his 1998 conviction stemming from a stand-off with police in June 1996. Before this Court, defendant asserts that the trial justice erred when he denied defendant’s claim that the state deliberately failed to disclose victim impact statements in violation of Rule 16 of the Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure. Defendant asserts also that the felony domestic assault count of his conviction is a lesser-included offense to the felony domestic assault with a dangerous weapon count, and therefore the two counts merged. The state, on the other hand, contends that defendant’s claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata and that, notwithstanding, the trial justice did not err in denying defendant’s request for a new trial.
2012-74 State v. Lewis Kausel (show cause)
The defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction after a jury trial on one count of simple assault/domestic. On appeal, the defendant asserts that the trial justice erred: (1) in failing to properly instruct the jury as to the elements of the charged conduct and in so doing, absolving the state of the burden of proving mens rea; (2) in limiting defendant’s cross-examination of the primary complaining witness; (3) in impermissibly allowing a police witness to vouch for the complaining witness’s credibility; and (4) in withholding from the defendant the complaining witness’s “victim impact statement,” purportedly received by the state post-trial but prior to sentencing.
2012-120 State v. Thomas Lamoureux (show cause)
The defendant appeals from a Superior Court judgment of conviction declaring him to be a violator of a previously suspended sentence. The defendant claims that the testimony of the witnesses presented by the state was not credible. He also argues that the hearing justice’s findings as to the defendant’s behavior do not support a determination of violation.