## Facts

- William Richard Gartlan, an ordained minister, put his three children to bed and then started the family car inside the attached garage.
- He left the engine running with the garage door closed, allowing carbon monoxide to build up in the home.
- During the night, his older daughter woke him; his son was completely unconscious, and his younger daughter was semiconscious and turning blue. The older daughter was also having breathing trouble.
- Gartlan turned off the car and called 911, and emergency responders treated the family for carbon monoxide poisoning. The children were taken to a hospital and survived.
- The next day, Gartlan went to the police station, cried, and confessed that he had tried to kill himself and his three children by running the car in the closed garage.
- Gartlan signed a written statement acknowledging responsibility and expressing remorse (including, “I did do this” and that he was sorry).
- A social worker later reported Gartlan said he knew he had caused the poisoning but had wanted to convince himself otherwise.
- Gartlan was indicted for three counts of attempted first-degree murder. At trial, he requested a jury instruction on abandonment of the attempt; the trial court refused, and the jury convicted him on all three counts.
- Gartlan appealed to the North Carolina Court of Appeals.

## Issues

1. Did the trial court err by refusing to instruct the jury on abandonment as a defense to attempted first-degree murder?
2. Did the trial court commit reversible error in its evidentiary rulings and in denying Gartlan’s related trial motions (including motions to dismiss, for mistrial, and to suppress statements)?

## Decision

- The North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the judgments and concluded there was no prejudicial error.
- The court held Gartlan was not entitled to an abandonment instruction because, viewing the evidence most favorably to the State, the criminal attempt was already complete once he carried out an overt act beyond preparation by running the vehicle in the closed garage with the intent to kill; his later decision to turn off the car and call 911 did not negate the completed attempt.
- The court rejected Gartlan’s remaining assignments of error, including challenges to evidentiary rulings and the denial of his motions, and found no basis for reversal.

## Legal Principles

- A criminal attempt requires: (1) intent to commit the offense, and (2) an overt act done for that purpose that goes beyond mere preparation, but (3) falls short of the completed crime.
- A defendant is entitled to a requested jury instruction only when a reasonable view of the evidence supports it.
- Where the defendant’s conduct has already satisfied the elements of attempt, a later change of mind and efforts to prevent harm do not erase liability for the attempt, and an abandonment instruction is not required.
- On a motion to dismiss for insufficient evidence, the question is whether there is substantial evidence of each element of the charged offense and the defendant as the perpetrator, viewed in the light most favorable to the State.
- Evidentiary rulings and decisions on mistrial and suppression are reviewed under established standards, and reversal generally requires a showing of prejudice.

## Conclusion

The Court of Appeals affirmed Gartlan’s three attempted first-degree murder convictions, holding that the evidence supported a finding that he intended to kill his children and committed an overt act beyond preparation by running the car in a closed garage long enough to poison them; because the attempt was complete before he turned off the engine and summoned help, he was not entitled to an abandonment-defense instruction, and the court found no prejudicial error in the remaining challenged rulings.


State v. Gartlan, 512 S.E.2d 74 (1999)