No constitutional violations or plain error is found in the defendant's convictions for first degree assault and other crimes after a re-trial. A defendant can be charged and convicted for multiple provisions of the Virgin Islands Code arising out of the same incident. Double Jeopardy protections of the Fifth Amendment do not prevent the retrial of a defendant who succeeds in getting a conviction vacated on direct appeal or on collateral attack because of error in the initial trial proceedings. Thus his acquittal in a prior trial on charges of first degree murder - in a trial in which the defendant was convicted of first degree assault - did not bar his conviction in the later retrial on charges of first degree assault with the intent to commit murder. A defendant can be guilty of first-degree assault regardless of whether he missed or actually succeeded in killing the target of the assault. Defendant's sentences for the crimes of first degree assault in violation of 14 V.I.C. § 295(1), unauthorized use of a firearm during the commission of an assault in the first degree in violation of 14 V.I.C. § 2253(a), and reckless endangerment in violation of 14 V.I.C. § 625(a) do not violate the multiple punishment limitation in 14 V.I.C. § 104. Reckless endangerment is a separate crime from the underlying violent offense because of the risk created to the public or third parties that is separate and apart from the risk created to the intended victim, and sentences for both first degree assault and the unauthorized use of a firearm during the commission of an assault in the first degree are not multiplicitous because the legislature clearly intended for additional sentencing where unauthorized firearms are involved. Defendant has waived the argument that attempted murder and first-degree assault with intent to commit murder are the same offense because it was not raised before the Superior Court. The judgment and commitment entered by the Superior Court is affirmed.
Supreme Court Of The Virgin Islands