Pubdate: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 Source: Fulton County Daily Report (GA) Copyright: 1999, American Lawyer Media Address: 190 Pryor Street, S.W., Atlanta, Ga. 30303 Fax: (404) 523-5924 Website: http://www.dailyreportonline.com/ Author: Trisha Renaud DRUG-ADDICTED MOTHER FACES MURDER COUNT IN NEWBORN'S DEATH CARNESVILLE-In what may be the state's first prosecution of its kind, a Franklin County woman is charged with murder for allegedly causing her baby's death by taking drugs while pregnant. Shannon Moss, 21, gave birth to twins April 21, but one child, Angel Hope Schneider, died shortly afterward. Prosecutors allege the child's death was directly attributable to Moss' use of drugs, specifically cocaine and amphetamines, while carrying the twins. It's apparently the first such prosecution in Georgia, and one that will undoubtedly be difficult. Kermit N. McManus, district attorney for the Conasauga Judicial Circuit and head of the District Attorneys' Association, and Gerald Weber, legal director of Georgia's American Civil Liberties Union chapter, say they believe this is the first such prosecution in Georgia. And, McManus adds, the case could "be a sticky wicket." Georgia appellate courts so far have rejected efforts to criminalize womens' conduct during pregnancy-even extreme conduct. In 1992, the Georgia Court of Appeals rejected Cobb County prosecutors' attempt to charge a woman with distribution of drugs after her newborn tested positive for cocaine. State v. Luster,, 204 Ga. App. 156 (1992). Last year, the Court of Appeals held that an 18-year-old woman who shot herself in the abdomen, allegedly in an attempt to abort her near-term fetus, could not be charged under the state's criminal abortion law. Hillman v. State,, 232 Ga. App. 741 (1998). Nor has the Legislature looked favorably on prosecuting pregnant women for drug use. As medical groups lobbied to treat addiction as a health issue rather than a criminal matter, legislators declined to pass a bill in 1990 that would have criminalized the transmission of drugs in utero. Nonetheless, when drug metabolites allegedly showed up in the system of Angel Schneider, Franklin County sheriff's investigators charged her mother with involuntary manslaughter. A grand jury this fall upped the charge to malice murder and felony murder. The indictment accuses Moss of intentionally ingesting drugs, "knowing she was pregnant and such action was harmful to her child, unlawfully causing the death of Angel Hope Schneider, a minor child, with malice aforethought." State v. Moss, No. 99-FCR-276J (Franklin Super. Sept. 15, 1999). Moss also is charged with possession of drugs. At a Nov. 8 bond hearing, caseworker Marie Loftus testified that the Department of Family and Children's Services took Moss' first child in 1998 because of the mother's drug use. Loftus said Moss had failed to comply with a DFACS plan to get her child back, including maintaining a stable living arrangement, securing drug and alcohol treatment, and getting a job. Loftus testified she believed most of Moss' problems as a parent stemmed from her drug use. The surviving twin also has been placed in foster care, according to court testimony. Assistant District Attorney Richard K. Bridgeman told Franklin County Superior Court Judge Lindsay A. Tise Jr. that Moss should stay in jail because she had refused to address her drug problem and, if she became pregnant again, could put another child at risk. When the prosecutor used the term "murder" in his argument, Moss began to cry. "The time for her to address her drug problem," Bridgeman said, "was before her child died." But Moss' attorney, F. Mayes Davison of Royston, argued that Georgia's appellate courts and Legislature don't want this type of prosecution. "This is not a murder case," Davison told Tise. The judge set a $50,000 bond for Moss, provided she enrolls in a live-in drug treatment facility. He also issued a stiff warning that he would not hand out any more chances: "If you mess up this time, you can forget it." Davison says "I've defended a lot of murder cases, but this is [one with] a twist." His client does have a serious drug addiction, he says, and taking drugs during pregnancy should not be condoned. Still, he says he intends to dispute the state's contention of what caused Angel's death. And he intends to move to dismiss the murder charge by arguing Georgia law does not permit it. The Luster and Hillman cases will form the basis for his attack on the indictment, he says. Franklin County District Attorney Robert W. Lavender, says he's aware of the difficulties in pursuing such a case. "I realize that I've got a hard row to hoe. But I'm not willing to let it go." It's an area of the law that needs addressing, he says, adding that "It's beyond me that the courts have held mothers can intentionally kill their children and suffer no consequences for it." In Luster, the appellate court held that a fetus in utero could not be considered a person to whom drugs could be distributed. The decision, written by former Judge John W. Sognier, noted that the Legislature had indicated "its view that addiction in pregnancy is a disease and signaled its preference for treatment over prosecution, which preference is overwhelmingly in accord with the opinions of local and national medical experts." In Hillman, the court found that Georgia's criminal abortion statute did not encompass a pregnant woman's actions to obtain an abortion, however egregious her conduct. Writing for the court, Judge Frank M. Eldridge wrote that the state's overly broad interpretation of the statue would mean that any woman who has a post-viability miscarriage could come under scrutiny to determine whether she intentionally acted to cause that miscarriage. "A woman would be at risk of a criminal indictment for virtually any perceived self-destructive behavior during her pregnancy which could cause a late-term miscarriage, to wit: smoking or drinking heavily; using illegal drugs or abusing legal medications; driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol; or any other dangerous or reckless conduct," Eldridge wrote. Lavender says he doesn't think smoking while pregnant would be a prosecutable offense but says engaging in illegal conduct, particularly with the knowledge that it would adversely affect an unborn child, is different. "What makes it really touchy," he says, "and what everybody is dancing around is the abortion issue." But, he adds, a medical procedure that terminates a fetus differs from illegal conduct that harms one. One prosecutor says he's rooting for Lavender to find a way to stop the terrible scourge of drug-addicted babies. "I personally cannot understand why a mother would put her child at risk," says Joseph Chambers, executive director of the Prosecuting Attorneys' Council. "It's just a bad, bad thing." He says if he were writing the law, "I'd prosecute them." Prosecutors need to "test the waters once in a while," says Chambers. "You just mark me on the side that I'm for keeping children safe. Sometimes it means going overboard." Chambers says certain drugs are known to be harmful and "I guess that's where you draw the line, at conduct known to be at risk." The ACLU's Weber says the murder case takes Luster one step further, charging a woman with "a more severe crime for the same conduct, essentially." Like Luster, Moss' prosecution will likely have difficulty establishing that due process requirements were met, Weber says. Criminal statutes are to be strictly construed and must put persons on notice that particular conduct is illegal, he adds. Davison says Georgia legislators "have opted for women to receive treatment. They do not wish to criminalize this type of behavior for obvious reasons." The government, he adds, "ought not get into the business of bringing murder charges against women who are drug-addicted." - --- MAP posted-by: Derek Rea