State v. Sanders
Vermont Supreme Court
716 A.2d 11 (1998)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
On March 31, 1996, Mark Sanders (defendant) confronted his live-in girlfriend (the victim) in their home. Sanders was not supposed to be there, and the victim was in the home with a friend of hers, Jodi Bell. Sanders began breaking glass and smashing things around the house, causing the women to lock themselves in a bathroom. Bell eventually ran next door to call the police, and when she returned, she saw Sanders and the victim standing in the kitchen. Bell stood between the victim and Sanders to protect the victim. At that point, Sanders picked up a knife and said, “someone is going to die . . . who’s it gonna be?” The state (plaintiff) charged Sanders with aggravated domestic assault for threatening to use a deadly weapon on a household member. At trial, the state was allowed to introduce evidence of two prior bad acts, or two prior incidents involving Sanders and the victim. The incidents occurred on February 10 and February 18, 1996, in the month before the charged offense. In the first prior incident, the victim asked Sanders to leave their apartment, and in response, he choked her and “threw her across the room.” The victim suffered a bloody nose. The second prior incident involved Sanders’s taking the victim’s car without permission and screaming threats at her to the effect that he would “never leave without a fight.” On the stand, the victim recanted most of the substantive facts regarding the two prior incidents. The jury convicted Sanders of the charged offense. Sanders appealed, arguing that the evidence of prior acts of domestic violence was inadmissible character evidence.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Morse, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.