State v. K. Parisian ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                               08/10/2021
    DA 18-0606
    Case Number: DA 18-0606
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
    2021 MT 202N
    STATE OF MONTANA,
    Plaintiff and Appellee,
    v.
    KEVIN J. PARISIAN,
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL FROM:            District Court of the Eighth Judicial District,
    In and For the County of Cascade, Cause No. DDC-17-237
    Honorable John W. Parker, Presiding Judge
    COUNSEL OF RECORD:
    For Appellant:
    Shannon L. Sweeney, Attorney at Law, Anaconda, Montana
    For Appellee:
    Austin Knudsen, Montana Attorney General, Roy Brown, Assistant
    Attorney General, Helena, Montana
    Joshua A. Racki, Cascade County Attorney, Great Falls, Montana
    Submitted on Briefs: June 2, 2021
    Decided: August 10, 2021
    Filed:
    oe,,6tA- -if
    __________________________________________
    Clerk
    Chief Justice Mike McGrath delivered the Opinion of the Court.
    ¶1     Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court Internal Operating
    Rules, this case is decided by memorandum opinion and shall not be cited and does not
    serve as precedent. Its case title, cause number, and disposition shall be included in this
    Court’s quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana
    Reports.
    ¶2     Kevin J. Parisian appeals from his August 23, 2018 sentence to the Montana State
    Prison for forty years with twenty suspended for the crime of aggravated kidnapping in
    violation of § 45-5-303, MCA. We affirm.
    ¶3     The State charged Kevin Parisian (Parisian) with aggravated kidnapping and assault
    with a weapon, alleging that, on April 20, 2017, Parisian held Peggy Ahenakew
    (Ahenakew) against her will at his apartment throughout the evening before holding her at
    knifepoint during a stand-off with police.
    ¶4     At trial, the jury heard testimony from Ahenakew, Parisian’s former girlfriend. She
    testified that, as she and Parisian walked to the store, she told Parisian that she was leaving
    him and ending the relationship when they returned to his apartment. Upon their return,
    an angry Parisian began throwing things, at Ahenakew, including beer and a Bluetooth
    speaker. He broke and hid her phones. Parisian slapped her until her nose bled, punched
    her, and choked her. Parisian hit Ahenakew behind the ear causing her to briefly lose
    consciousness. At one point, when Parisian momentarily turned his back on Ahenakew,
    she ran down the stairs and attempted to make a run down the street, but Parisian ran after
    2
    her, pulled her by the hair, and brought her back to the apartment. Parisian called her a
    “fucking bitch” and said that she “wasn’t leaving.”
    ¶5    In the apartment, Parisian pushed Ahenakew on the bed, grabbed her face, smeared
    her makeup, and said she “wasn’t fucking going anywhere.” She responded: “Okay,” at
    which point Parisian said “Yeah, you could go.” Ahenakew pieced together her phone and
    called a cab, but when it arrived Parisian told the driver that the cab was not needed and
    sent it away. Ahenakew unsuccessfully tried to signal to the cab driver through the kitchen
    window to call the police. At one point, Ahenakew screamed for help, hoping someone in
    the building would hear her.
    ¶6    Eventually, Ahenakew was able to call her daughter from the landline and
    whispered to her to call police. When Parisian found out, he said he was going to make
    the officers shoot him and began watching the doors.
    ¶7    Ahenakew testified to intermittent violence throughout most of the four hours
    between when they returned from the store and when the police arrived and that, once
    Parisian became violent, she never felt free to leave. A downstairs neighbor testified to
    hearing fighting, loud screams, and the sound of items being thrown as well as to
    witnessing a cab drive up.
    ¶8    Great Falls Police Officers Tad Kimmett (Kimmett) and Jared Wolf (Wolf) testified
    that upon arrival to the apartment complex, both observed the apartment door fly open
    rapidly with a woman later identified as Ahenakew standing in the doorway. Kimmett
    observed that Ahenakew was upset and had an expression of fear and pain on her face,
    3
    non-oxidized blood on her clothing, and injuries and redness on her face. Ahenakew called
    to the officers: “Over here, I’m over here.”
    ¶9     The officers then observed Parisian appear in the doorway with an object that
    appeared to them to be a handgun. Both officers drew their weapons and Kimmett ordered
    Parisian to “[d]rop it.” As Parisian set the item down, Kimmett realized the object was
    actually a cordless power drill and he lowered his pistol slightly. However, Parisian then
    grabbed Ahenakew from behind, holding her in front of him. Kimmett said, “Let her go.
    Get away.” Parisian pulled a knife from his waistband and held it to Ahenakew’s throat.
    Kimmett said “Drop the knife. Drop the knife,” aiming his pistol at Parisian again. Parisian
    did not comply. Ahenakew was able to pull away from Parisian to her left, opening
    Kimmett’s line of sight to the right side of Parisian’s torso. Kimmett fired two rounds and
    Parisian stumbled backward, fell onto a couch in the apartment, and went unconscious.
    Kimmett observed the apartment in a state of disarray, noting overturned furniture and
    broken glass in the living room. Ahenakew testified to substantially the same course of
    events.
    ¶10    The emergency room doctor who treated Ahenakew testified to noticing bruises
    from recent trauma in locations where Ahenakew described pain, including her head, arm,
    anterior chest, left ear, and forehead.
    ¶11    Agent Anthony Poppler (Poppler) of the Department of Justice testified to
    conducting an independent investigation of the apartment and noted indications of a
    struggle or fight. Poppler documented bloodstains throughout the apartment, as well as
    damaged phones and Bluetooth speaker. Poppler indicated that the bullet trajectory was
    4
    consistent with Kimmett’s version of events. A knife was recovered near where Parisian
    fell.
    ¶12     Parisian testified in his defense, stating that Ahenakew had taken his money and
    keys and the two had “wrestled” as he attempted to retrieve them. According to Parisian,
    the altercation eventually led to him breaking the glass on the entertainment center,
    followed by him cutting his finger on glass, at which point he “got madder,” flipped a card
    table, and slapped Ahenakew a number of times. Parisian testified that he did not attempt
    to prevent Ahenakew from making a phone call. He also testified that, at some point
    between when he and Ahenakew had returned from the store and when the police arrived,
    he took a nap anywhere from 45 to 90 minutes in length. He denied dragging Ahenakew
    back into the house when she went outside, testifying that she could have left.
    ¶13     Parisian testified that at the time Ahenakew opened the door as police arrived, he
    was sitting on the couch, though he did not “know what the timeframe [was].” He testified
    that he had a cordless drill in one hand and a drywall saw in the other and that Kimmett
    had said, “[s]how me your hands,” at which point Parisian moved away and was shot.
    ¶14     The jury was instructed that “[a] person commits the crime of Aggravated
    Kidnapping if the person knowingly or purposely, and without lawful authority restrains
    another person by using or threatening to use physical force with the purpose to inflict
    bodily injury on, or terrorize” the victim. The jury convicted Parisian of aggravated
    kidnapping and assault with a weapon. The District Court sentenced Parisian to Montana
    State Prison for 40 years, with 20 suspended, for aggravated kidnapping in addition to 20
    years, concurrently and with no time suspended, for assault with a weapon.
    5
    ¶15    Parisian appeals the sentence for aggravated kidnapping. He acknowledges that he
    did not object to the sentence at the time it was imposed, but requests that we exercise plain
    error review over his claim. This Court may exercise its discretion to review unpreserved
    claims of error that implicate a fundamental right and when such review is necessary to
    prevent manifest miscarriage of justice, compromise to the integrity of the judicial process,
    or unsettled questions of fundamental fairness. State v. Akers, 
    2017 MT 311
    , ¶ 13, 
    389 Mont. 531
    , 
    408 P.3d 142
    .
    ¶16    Section 45-5-303(2), MCA, states in pertinent part:
    Except as provided in 46-18-219 and 46-18-222, a person convicted of the
    offense of aggravated kidnapping shall be punished by death or life
    imprisonment as provided in 46-18-301 through 46-18-310 or be imprisoned
    in the state prison for a term of not less than 2 years or more than 100 years
    and may be fined not more than $ 50,000, unless the person has voluntarily
    released the victim alive, in a safe place, and with no serious bodily injury,
    in which event the person shall be imprisoned in the state prison for a term
    of not less than 2 years or more than 10 years and may be fined not more
    than $ 50,000.
    (Emphasis added.)
    ¶17    Parisian argues that unless the State proves to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that
    the defendant has not “voluntarily released the victim alive, in a safe place, and with no
    serious bodily injury,” a defendant may not be sentenced to more than ten years. Parisian
    points to Apprendi v. New Jersey, which requires that “any fact that increases the penalty
    for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum” must be proven beyond a reasonable
    doubt. 
    530 U.S. 466
    , 490-91, 497, 
    120 S. Ct. 2348
    , 2362-63, 2367 (2000) (invalidating, as
    an “unacceptable departure from the jury tradition,” a sentencing scheme allowing a
    6
    sentence enhancement upon the sentencing judge finding, by a preponderance of the
    evidence, that the underlying crime was committed for a specified purpose).
    ¶18    Parisian argues that § 45-5-303, MCA, creates three separate aggravated kidnapping
    crimes, each with a different maximum sentence of ten years, 100 years, or death or life
    imprisonment. Relevant here, whether a judge can impose up to 100 years or only up to
    ten years turns upon whether a defendant “voluntarily released the victim alive, in a safe
    place, and with no serious bodily injury.” Section 45-5-303(2), MCA. The “statutory
    maximum”—sentencing beyond which requires additional facts to be proven beyond a
    reasonable doubt—for Apprendi purposes is the “maximum sentence a judge may impose
    solely on the basis of the facts reflected in the jury verdict or admitted by the defendant.”
    Blakely v. Washington, 
    542 U.S. 296
    , 303, 
    124 S. Ct. 2531
    , 2537 (2004). Parisian argues
    that the “statutory maximum” here is ten years, as the facts reflected in the jury verdict or
    admitted by Parisian do not establish that he did not voluntarily release Ahenakew “alive,
    in a safe place, and with no serious bodily injury.” The alleged error is that Parisian was
    sentenced beyond the statutory maximum on the basis of facts that were not proven to a
    jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
    ¶19    Parisian misapplies Apprendi to the facts of this case. But in any event, Parisian
    does not demonstrate that manifest miscarriage of justice, compromised judicial integrity,
    or unsettled questions of fundamental fairness will arise if we do not exercise plain error
    review over this case. Here, the evidence clearly demonstrated that Parisian had not
    “voluntarily released [Ahenakew] alive, in a safe place, and with no serious bodily injury.”
    Ahenakew testified that she never felt free to leave once Parisian became violent. She also
    7
    testified to screaming for help, attempting to signal to a taxicab driver through the window
    for help, and eventually whispering to her daughter over the phone to call the police.
    Medical reports corroborated Ahenakew’s testimony that she had been injured by a number
    of blunt force traumas, including to the chest and head, and police found obvious signs of
    a violent struggle on Ahenakew and in the apartment, the noise of which was corroborated
    by a neighbor. The harrowing nature of this protracted violent struggle and Ahenakew’s
    desperate attempts to get help strongly suggest that Ahenakew would have left the
    apartment long before police arrived, had she been “voluntarily released.”
    ¶20    Moreover, testimony that Parisian had hidden or broken Ahenakew’s phones,
    prevented her from getting into a taxicab, and dragged her back into the house after
    attempting to flee demonstrates that he was not “voluntarily realeas[ing]” her.
    ¶21    Additionally, the evidence established that an ongoing aggravated kidnapping was
    occurring as Parisian held Ahenakew hostage at knifepoint during the standoff with police.
    It is undisputed that Parisian’s interaction with police ended upon Parisian being shot, not
    any voluntary action by Parisian to release Ahenakew.
    ¶22    Overwhelming evidence admitted at trial established that Ahenakew was not
    “voluntarily released” from at least one instance of aggravated kidnapping by Parisian. As
    such, we need not exercise plain error review of Parisian’s Apprendi claim in order to avoid
    a potential manifest miscarriage of justice, compromise to the integrity of the judicial
    process, or unsettled questions of fundamental fairness.         We decline to exercise
    discretionary plain error review of Parisian’s conviction.
    8
    ¶23    We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c) of our
    Internal Operating Rules, which provides for memorandum opinions. In the opinion of the
    Court, the case presents a question controlled by settled law or by the clear application of
    applicable standards of review.
    ¶24    Affirmed.
    /S/ MIKE McGRATH
    We Concur:
    /S/ LAURIE McKINNON
    /S/ BETH BAKER
    /S/ INGRID GUSTAFSON
    /S/ DIRK M. SANDEFUR
    9
    

Document Info

Docket Number: DA 18-0606

Filed Date: 8/10/2021

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/10/2021