6
evidence, Virgil moved for a judgment of acquittal on grounds that the
State had failed to prove “there was a domestic relationship” or that
Virgil injured N.J. The district court denied the motion.
The marshaling instruction at the second trial was the same as the
first. Again, no instruction defining household member was requested or
given. During deliberation, the jury sent a note to the court, stating,
“Define: Reside + Domestic.” The court discussed the matter with
counsel outside the presence of the jury:
THE COURT: . . . There is no definition that I am
aware of as to what reside means other than its common
sense meaning. As far as domestic goes, I think the only
instruction that I probably can do is to refer them to the
marshaling instruction, numbered paragraph three, and
they will have to go from there. What are your thoughts?
Both counsel stated they “agree[d]” with the court. The court therefore
told the jury,
The only advice we can give you on that would be reside has
its common ordinary every day meaning, so you will have to
resolve that issue as to whether the state has established by
evidence beyond a reasonable doubt whether Mr. Virgil
resided [with N.J.] or not. As far as domestic goes, the best
definition we can give you is in the marshaling instruction, I
believe that’s [No.] 20, numbered paragraph 3[,] and you will
have to make your determination on the basis of the
evidence as to whether there has been a domestic
relationship proven here by evidence beyond a reasonable
doubt, domestic again being best defined by that numbered
paragraph three, has the state proven one or the other of
those matters.
The jury found Virgil guilty of domestic abuse assault. Virgil had two
prior domestic assault convictions. The court sentenced him to an
indeterminate term of up to five years in prison with a mandatory one-
year minimum and a $750 fine. If he had been convicted only of the
lesser included offense of simple assault, he would have faced only thirty
days in jail. Iowa Code § 708.2(6); id. § 903.1.