Court rules that casino floor is not a weapon

The state Supreme Court has thrown out a felony assault conviction against a mixed martial arts fighter accused of slamming a drunk amputee into a casino floor. At issue, according to the opinion released on Thursday, was the prosecution's contention that the floor of Mason County's Little Creek Casino was a weapon. In a unanimous decision, the high court found that it was not. James Michael Marohl, described in court documents as a mixed martial arts fighter, was convicted of third-degree assault in the June 2007 incident, in which he forced an intoxicated man to the floor, according to the Supreme Court opinion. The other man suffered scrapes and bruises, and a broken prosthetic arm.

Writing for the unanimous court, Justice Richard Sanders noted that the alleged victim had been cut off from the bar after imbibing to excess. The man was walking to his seat when he knocked over a chair, nearly striking the wife of a friend of Marohl's. Confronted by the woman's husband, the alleged victim repeatedly put his arm around the man while attempting to apologize. Marohl then grabbed the alleged victim from behind and was forcing him toward the exit, when the amputee dropped to the floor. Sanders noted that conflicting descriptions of the incident were offered at trial. Witnesses for the prosecution described Marohl choking the victim until he lost consciousness and forcing him to the floor. Defense witnesses said Marohl was simply trying to guide him out of the bar when he tripped and fell.



In either case, both men fell to the casino floor, Sanders said. Either the choke hold or the impact caused the alleged victim to lose consciousness for several minutes. "The impact with the casino floor caused (the victim) to suffer bruises and scrapes on his face, and his prosthetic arm broke off above the elbow joint," Sanders said in the opinion. "Marohl got to his feet and walked away but then returned to try to help (the victim) off the ground." Charged with second-degree assault, a Mason County jury convicted Marohl of a lesser offence, third-degree assault. But the high court found jurors were misinformed when the prosecution suggested the casino floor could qualify and be considered as a weapon in determining whether Marohl committed third-degree assault.

"Accepting Marohl forced (the victim) to the ground, there is no evidence his use of the ground transformed it into an object similar to a weapon," Sanders noted. "The issue in this case is whether a floor is an instrument or thing likely to produce harm when the defendant causes the victim to impact the ground. The plain meaning of the statute is unambiguous - under these circumstances, the casino floor was not similar to a weapon, nor was it likely to produce bodily harm.'" Reversing a Court of Appeals decision affirming the conviction, the high court dismissed the jury's finding.