Girouard v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1991 · Criminal Law

Criminal LawMurderManslaughterAdequate Provocationvoluntary manslaughtersecond degree murderadequate provocationheat of passion

Facts

Steven and Joyce Girouard had a tense marriage, and on the night of Joyce's death they argued after Steven overheard her speaking on the telephone. Joyce followed him into the bedroom, stepped on his back, pulled his hair, and repeatedly taunted and insulted him, saying she wanted a divorce, had never wanted to marry him, and had filed charges against him that could lead to a court-martial. Steven then went to the kitchen, got a long-handled knife, returned to the bedroom, and after Joyce continued talking, stabbed her 19 times. At trial, defense experts testified that Steven had bottled up anger and then exploded in rage and panic.

Issue

Whether the victim's taunting and insulting words, together with the surrounding circumstances, constituted legally adequate provocation to reduce an intentional killing from second degree murder to voluntary manslaughter. More specifically, the court had to decide whether words alone are adequate provocation.

Rule

Voluntary manslaughter is an intentional homicide committed in a sudden heat of passion caused by adequate provocation, before there has been a reasonable opportunity for the passion to cool. Under Maryland law, the Rule of Provocation requires: (1) adequate provocation; (2) killing in the heat of passion; (3) a sudden heat of passion before cooling time; and (4) a causal connection between the provocation, the passion, and the fatal act. Adequate provocation must be such as would inflame the passion of a reasonable person and cause action from passion rather than reason, and insulting or taunting words alone, however offensive, are not legally adequate provocation.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Baltimore, Nina Cross told her boyfriend, Evan Pike, during an argument that she had never loved him, had been mocking him to friends for months, and planned to ruin his reputation at work. Evan immediately grabbed a metal poker from the fireplace and killed her.

If Evan is charged with murder and argues the killing should be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter, which is the best answer?

Explanation. Voluntary manslaughter requires, among other things, adequate provocation judged by an objective reasonable-person standard. The majority held that words alone, however abusive, insulting, or taunting, are not legally adequate provocation. Because Nina's conduct here consists only of verbal insults and threats about reputation, mitigation is unavailable on that theory.