WOODLAND — Acquitted of both first- and second-degree murder in the shooting death of her husband, Susan Hoskins has her first bid at freedom in more than a year while prosecutors decide whether to retry her on a lesser charge.
Hoskins was freed from the Yolo County Jail on $140,000 bail as of this morning. On Monday, Yolo Superior Court Judge David Reed declared a mistrial in her homicide case, the result of jurors saying they were hopelessly deadlocked on a count of voluntary manslaughter.
“At this point I think we have exhausted all of the information,” the forewoman told Reed on the panel’s eighth day of deliberations in the case. The nine-woman, three-man jury had split 7-5 in favor of guilt, even after hearing a second round of closing arguments earlier in the day.
Reed set bail and scheduled a trial-setting conference for Nov. 23, at which time the District Attorney’s Office is expected to announce if it will try the case a second time. Hoskins remained in Yolo County Jail custody as of this morning.
The 60-year-old Woodland woman was charged with an open count of murder in connection with the Aug. 3, 2014, fatal shooting of her husband, Bryan Hoskins Sr., in the kitchen of their Knollwood Drive condominium. That gave jurors the ability to consider lesser counts, depending on which theory of the case they found most plausible.
For prosecutors, it was that Susan Hoskins intentionally killed her husband, her frustration over his alcoholism, name-calling and repeated accusations of infidelity coming to a head after a day of motorcycle-riding and bar-hopping that left both of them legally intoxicated.
But defense attorneys contended the shooting was a classic case of self-defense — that Bryan Hoskins psychologically, emotionally and physically abused his wife for years and was lunging at her in an alcohol-fueled rage when she pulled the trigger of the .22-caliber revolver.
The jury had deliberated since the afternoon of Oct. 15.
Deputy District Attorney Carolyn Palumbo declined to comment on the trial’s outcome Monday, as did Bryan Hoskins Jr., the victim’s son and defendant’s stepson, who attended each day of the proceedings that began in early September.
But lead defense attorney J. Tony Serra had plenty to say, calling prosecutors “overambitious” and “arrogant” in their pursuit of the case.
“This was never a murder case,” Serra said outside the courtroom. “Any other county would have offered her manslaughter (in a plea deal). It’s a waste of money, but that’s the prosecution’s prerogative.”
Serra said in court that Susan Hoskins would live with her mother in the Bay Area after posting bail.
Several jurors contacted by The Enterprise as they left the courthouse declined to comment on their deliberation process but did offer their condolences to Hoskins Jr.
“I’m sorry that we didn’t come to some resolve for you,” the forewoman said.
Inklings that the group was considering a possible manslaughter verdict first arose last Wednesday morning, when the jury submitted two written notes to Judge Reed — one seeking clarification about the manslaughter verdict form, the other asking why involuntary manslaughter was not an option for conviction.
Reed had declined to instruct the jury on involuntary manslaughter earlier in the trial, saying the facts of the case did not support the theory that Bryan Hoskins’ death was accidental.
On Friday afternoon came a third note: “We have not been able to reach a unanimous decision on the manslaughter charge,” the forewoman reported.
Reed summoned the jury to court Monday morning and, with at least one juror saying the group could benefit from further talks, invited attorneys in the case to offer brief additional arguments on reasonable doubt, the legal issue jurors indicated they had been struggling over.
“In this case, there aren’t two reasonable alternatives,” Palumbo said in her remarks. Bryan Hoskins “didn’t do anything that would justify dying, and that’s what’s so difficult in this particular case. He was standing in the kitchen calling her names, and that’s it. … She’s the one that increased the violence by getting the gun.”
Defense attorney Shannan Dugan disputed that, telling jurors that Bryan Hoskins’ angry outburst that August night marked the latest act in a 20-year history of psychological, emotional and physical abuse, and it thrust Susan Hoskins into a state of terror.
“This is about imminent threat of great bodily injury or death — that’s what it’s always been about,” Dugan said. “She made a split-second decision to make sure that he didn’t hurt her or kill her or rape her, and that was reasonable under those circumstances.”
The jury met for another hour, but the additional arguments never changed its 7-5 vote.
— Reach Lauren Keene at lkeene@davisenterprise.net or 530-747-8048. Follow her on Twitter at @laurenkeene
