## Facts

- Robert Brian Fulcher drank heavily at a bar in Torrington, Wyoming, and later claimed he remembered little after leaving the bar.
- Police found Fulcher and a friend in an alley behind the bar with abrasions; they were combative and were booked for public intoxication and disturbing the peace.
- During booking, Fulcher had slurred speech but could accurately count several hundred dollars in cash and walk to his cell without assistance.
- Fulcher was placed in a cell with Martin Hernandez, who was lying unconscious on the floor.
- A jailer heard sounds consistent with kicking; upon returning, he saw Fulcher kicking and stomping on Hernandez’s head.
- Fulcher told the officer Hernandez had “fallen out of bed,” but Hernandez was bleeding heavily, required about 52 stitches, and lost multiple teeth.
- Fulcher was tried in a bench trial and convicted of aggravated assault without a dangerous weapon under Wyo. Stat. § 6-4-506(a) (1977).
- Fulcher presented expert testimony from a forensic psychiatrist that he acted in “traumatic automatism,” meaning a lack of conscious and willful control and awareness of the environment.
- Fulcher had initially pleaded not guilty by reason of temporary mental illness, then changed to not guilty; the trial court allowed automatism evidence under the not-guilty plea.

## Issues

1. Whether a defendant must plead not guilty by reason of mental illness or deficiency before presenting evidence of unconsciousness/automatism.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction for aggravated assault without a dangerous weapon.

## Decision

- The Wyoming Supreme Court held a defendant need not plead not guilty by reason of mental illness or deficiency to introduce evidence of unconsciousness/automatism.
- The court treated automatism as distinct from statutory mental-illness defenses and permissible to raise under a general not-guilty plea because it bears on voluntariness and mens rea.
- The court affirmed the conviction, concluding the evidence permitted the trial judge to find the elements proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The court held the trial judge, as fact-finder, could weigh and reject the defense expert’s automatism opinion in light of contrary circumstantial evidence, including eyewitness observations of the assault and Fulcher’s conduct before and after booking.

## Legal Principles

- Evidence of unconsciousness (automatism) may be offered under a general plea of not guilty when it is used to contest voluntariness of the act or the required mental state.
- Automatism is not the same as a statutory mental-illness defense and does not automatically trigger the procedural consequences associated with a mental-illness plea.
- Unconsciousness is not a complete defense in all cases; when linked to voluntary intoxication, the fact-finder may treat the claim with caution.
- On appellate review for sufficiency, conflicts in evidence and the weight of expert testimony are for the trier of fact; a conviction stands if the evidence supports a rational finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Conclusion

The Wyoming Supreme Court allowed automatism to be litigated under a not-guilty plea as a challenge to voluntariness and mens rea, but upheld Fulcher’s aggravated-assault conviction because the trial judge could reasonably find conscious, voluntary conduct based on the eyewitness account and surrounding circumstances, notwithstanding expert testimony of traumatic automatism.


Fulcher v. State, 633 P.2d 142 (Wyo. 1981)