Marc Burrell was convicted of manslaughter after shooting and killing Douglas Saari at a house. Burrell claimed he had a lazy eye that made it difficult to see anything to his left. He appealed the conviction, arguing the jury was not instructed that they had to find he voluntarily pulled the trigger. The New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that criminal liability only requires the overall conduct include a voluntary act, not that every single preceding act be voluntary as well.

1. HaroldSowards
CJ 322, Tu/Th 9:30
9/7/15
State v. Burrell
609 A.2d 751 (N.H. 1992)
1. Facts
 Marc Burrell isconvictedof manslaughterafterajurytrial inSuperiorCourt
 Goesto drinkwithDouglasSaari at JoeyBaglione’shouse
 Saari andBurrell wantto steal the weaponsatBaglione’s
 Baglione threatensthemwithashotgunandisshotand killedbyBurrell
 Burrell claimsthathe had a lazy eye whichmakesitdifficulttosee anythingtohisleft
duringcross-examination
 In NewHampshire accordingtoRSA 626:1 a personisnotguiltyof an offense unlesshis
criminal liabilityisbasedonconductthatincludesavoluntaryactor the voluntary
omissiontoperformanact of whichhe is physicallycapable
 Burrell appealssayingthatthe SuperiorCourtfailedtoinstructthe jurythattheymust
findthe act of the pullingof the triggervoluntary
 NewHampshire Supreme Courtaffirmsthe decision
2. Issue
Is the state requiredtoprove that Burrell’slastactwas voluntaryinorderforthemto establish
criminal liability?
3. Holdings
No,affirmed
4. Reasoning
Theystate that there isno supportfor Burrell’sproposition,withwhattoinstructthe jury
regardinghisact, ineitherthe statute orin New Hampshire’scase law.The statute onlyrequires
that the conduct givesrise tocriminal liabilityincludesavoluntaryact.There isno requirement
that everyact precedingthe actual commissionof the offensetobe voluntary.