University of Baltimore Law Forum Volume 29 Article 19 Number 1 Fall 1998

1998 Recent Developments: Sippio v. State: Medical Examiner's as to Victim's Manner of Death Is Appropriate Where the Autopsy Report Has Been Admitted into Cheryl F. Matricciani

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf Part of the Law Commons

Recommended Citation Matricciani, Cheryl F. (1998) "Recent Developments: Sippio v. State: Medical Examiner's Testimony as to Murder Victim's Manner of Death Is Appropriate Where the Autopsy Report Has Been Admitted into Evidence," University of Baltimore Law Forum: Vol. 29 : No. 1 , Article 19. Available at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf/vol29/iss1/19

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Baltimore Law Forum by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Recent Developments Sippio v. State

n a case of first impression, MEDICAL The court of appeals addressed I the Court of Appeals of the admissibility of a medical Maryland held that the state EXAMINER'S examiner's testimony as to a medical examiner may testify as to TESTIMONY AS TO murder victim's manner of death a murder victim's manner of death MURDER by reviewing an earlier decision when the medical examiner's VICTIM'S where the court considered the autopsy report, which notes MANNER OF admissibility of a death certificate manner of death, has been DEATH IS that contained a medical admitted into evidence. Sippio v. examiner's written opinion as to State, 350 Md. 633, 714 A.2d 864 APPROPRIATE manner of death. Sippio, 350 Md. (1998). The court also held that a WHERE THE at 645, 714 A.2d at 870. In criminal defendant may not AUTOPSY REPORT Benjamin v. Woodring, 268 Md. present character evidence of his HAS BEEN 593, 303 A.2d 779 (1973), the truthfulness without first ADMITTED INTO court held that the manner of death testifying, or, in the alternative, EVIDENCE portion of the death certificate was without requesting to vary the inadmissible because it contained order of proof, and making a By Cheryl F. Matricciani "such non-factual information as binding proffer of his to 'indications, inferences, or testify. The ruling sets forth a new issue reserved for the . The conclusions drawn by the trend because the court had never trial court overruled the objection certificate maker that did not considered the admissibility of a and allowed the testimony. Sippio qualify as 'essential facts medical examiner's opmIOn additionally sought to introduce concerning the medical causes of testimony as to manner of death. testimony as to his character for death.'" Sippio, 350 Md. at 644- On December 30, 1995, truthfulness without first 45, 714 A.2d at 870 (quoting Dwayne Sippio ("Sippio") fired a testifying. The court sustained the Benjamin, 268 Md. at 606, 608, shot that killed Brenda Branch state's objection to the testimony 303 A.2d at 787, 788). Sippio ("Branch"). Although Sippio and excluded the evidence. argued that the Benjamin court's confessed to the shooting, he Sippio was convicted in the holding should be extended to maintained that it was an accident. Circuit Court for Baltimore City of preclude a medical examiner from At trial, the court admitted into second degree murder, felonious testifying concerning manner of evidence the victim's autopsy use of a handgun, and unlawfully death. Id. at 645, 714 A.2d at 870. report prepared by Dr. John wearing, carrying, and transporting Before distinguishing Smialek, Chief Medical Examiner a handgun. The Court of Special Benjamin from the instant case, for the State of Maryland which Appeals of Maryland, in a per however, the court of appeals first stated the victim's manner of curium opinion, affirmed the examined Health General Article death. In its case-in-chief, the conviction. The Court of Appeals of the Annotated Code of prosecution offered Dr. Smialek's of Maryland affirmed that ruling Maryland, section 5-301 et seq., testimony that Branch's manner of after carefully considering the role which establishes the procedures a death was homicide. Sippio of expert testimony, the procedure medical examiner must follow objected, contending that Dr. for offering character evidence when a death results from suicide, Smialek's testimony was improper under the common law, and the homicide, or accident. !d. The as it resolved an ultimate legal Maryland Rules of Evidence. court noted that the 1990

29.1 U. Balt. L.F. 75 Recent Developments amendment to section 5-311 added noted that when Benjamin was training and professional the words "manner of death" to the decided, "determining manner of experience qualified him to testify list of items the medical examiner death was merely 'incumbent upon as an expert; (2) the subject matter must include in an autopsy report. [medical examiners] in completing was appropriate for expert Id at 646, 714 A.2d at 871. The the [death certificate] form.''' Id testimony because Dr. Smialek court reasoned, therefore, that "[t]o at 647, 714 A.2d at 871 (quoting clearly described the fatal gunshot create a per se rule prohibiting Benjamin, 268 Md. at 609, 303 wound in terms understandable to such testimony would be akin to A.2d at 788). Accordingly, the the jury; and (3) a legally holding that medical examiners are court declined Sippio's request to sufficient factual basis existed to not qualified to determine manner prohibit the medical examiner's support the testimony because Dr. of death, or that medical testimony regarding manner of Smialek performed the autopsy examiners' findings are generally death. Id. at 648, 714 A.2d at 872. and reviewed the facts surrounding unreliable evidence in a court of After determining that the the shooting. Id. at 649-53, 714 law." Id. at 647, 714 A.2d at 871. subject of the testimony was A.2d at 872-74. The court In differentiating Benjamin appropriate, the court looked to concluded, therefore, that Dr. from the instant case, the court Maryland Rule of Evidence 5-702 Smialek's testimony as to manner reviewed Terry v. State, 34 Md. and found that the admissibility of of death was a proper subject for App. 99, 366 A.2d 65 (1976), expert testimony depends on expert testimony. Id. at 652, 714 where the Court of Special whether it would aid the trier of A.2d at 874. Appeals of Maryland upheld the fact in understanding the evidence The court also rejected admissibility of a medical or in determining a fact in issue. Sippio's assertion that Dr. examiner's opinion testimony as to Id at 649, 714 A.2d at 872. The Smialek's testimony concerning manner of death. Sippio, 350 Md. court found that Dr. Smialek's the victim's manner of death was a at 647, 714 A.2d at 871. In Terry, testimony aided the jury's legal conclusion reserved for the which was decided prior to the understanding when he explained jury. Id at 653, 714 A.2d at 874. 1990 amendment to section 5-311, that homicide was the killing of The court determined that the the court held that despite the one human being by another, ultimate issue was not whether Benjamin court's suggestion that a regardless of intent, and that a Branch's death was a homicide, medical examiner's investigative medical exammer does not but whether the shooting was duties were limited by law to consider the intent of the suspect accidental or deliberate. Id. at 655, essential facts concerning the when investigating the manner of 714 A.2d at 875. The court found medical causes of death, "'we death. Id at 652, 656, 714 A.2d at . that Dr. Smialek's testimony as to cannot conceive that this precludes 874, 875. The court noted that manner of death did not address calling the medical examiner as an without Dr. Smialek's testimony, Sippio's intent and was, therefore, expert to express his the jurors might have given the appropriate. Id. at 654, 714 A.2d opinion in a case.'" Id. at 647-48, word "homicide" a "degree of at 875. The court cautioned, 714 A.2d at 871 (quoting Terry, 34 culpability greater than its however, that its holding was Md. App. at 107-08, 366 A.2d at definition allows." Id. limited to the situation where a 70). Adopting the court's rational The court analyzed Dr. medical examiner's report was in Terry, the court held that Smialek's testimony and properly admitted into evidence, Benjamin was inapposite to the determined that it met the three and not where a report's instant case and that testimony requirements outlined in Maryland admissibility was contested. !d. at concerning manner of death was Rule 5-702. Id. at 649, 714 A.2d 656, 714 A.2d at 875. Sippio appropriate. !d. at 648, 714 A.2d at 872. In so doing, the court waived the latter issue, according at 872. Additionally, the court found that: (1) Dr. Smialek's to the court, when he did not

29.1 U. Bait. L.F. 76 Recent Developments object to the introduction of the that a defendant must still testify in limited the introduction of a medical examiner's report into order to present the character medical examiner's testimony to evidence. Id. evidence. Id. at 664, 714 A.2d at instances where the medical In addressing the second issue 879. To permit a criminal examiner's report is admitted into concerning character evidence, the defendant to present character evidence, such an objection may court examined specific evidence without first testifying, prevent the opinion testimony circumstances under which the court reasoned, allows the from being introduced into character evidence is permissible. defendant to support his or her evidence. Id. at 663, 714 A.2d at 879. The good character for truthfulness court first affirmed the without first placing that character requirement that a criminal trait at issue. Id. The court, defendant must testify before however, noted that Maryland presenting character evidence for Rules 5-104(b) and 5-611(a) truthfulness. Id. at 664, 714 A.2d permit a to vary the order in at 879. In so doing, the court which a defendant presents found that a defendant's promise evidence, thereby allowing a to testify during opening argument defendant to present character was not binding, and therefore, evidence before testifying. Id. at failed to meet the requirement. Id. 665, 714 A.2d at 880. However, a at 665, 714 A.2d at 880. The court defendant must make a binding next looked to Maryland Rule of announcement that he will testify. Evidence 5-608, and agreed that a Id. defendant's character for In Sippio v. State, the court held truthfulness first must be attacked that opinion testimony by a before a witness may offer medical examiner as to manner of testimony supporting the death is appropriate to supplement defendant's character for a properly admitted medical truthfulness. Id. at 663, 714 A.2d examiner's report. This places an at 879. The court then reviewed undue burden on a defendant who Sahin v. State, 337 Md. 304, 653 must overcome a seemingly A.2d 452 (1995), which held that a irrebuttable presumption when criminal defendant may offer testimony is admitted that the character evidence for truthfulness victim's manner of death was without the prosecution first homicide. A special instruction to attacking the defendant's the jury to consider the testimony character. Sippio, 350 Md. at 662, only for its medical relevance, and 714 A.2d at 879. The court in not as conclusive evidence of the Sahin reasoned that because the defendant's intent, may provide defendant was charged with a the defendant with some leverage character impeaching offense, the against the testimony. Another charge alone represented a option is to object to the sufficient attack on the defendant's introduction of the medical character. Id. at 663, 714 A.2d at examiner's report and seek to have 879. However, the court in Sippio the testimony similarly excluded. noted that the key to Sahin was As the court here seems to have

29.1 U. Bait. L.F. 77