Supreme Court reverses woman’s conviction in death of her son

Tuesday, Oct. 12, 1999 | 10:52 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- Three years after the Nevada Supreme Court upheld the second-degree murder conviction of a Reno woman, the court says now it was wrong.

The court Monday overturned the conviction of Kriseya Labastida, saying it had "misapprehended material matters of fact and law. ..."

Labastida had been convicted of second-degree murder and felony child neglect in the death of her infant son. She was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole for the murder charge and 20 years for the neglect count. The neglect conviction still stands.

Labastida's husband, Michael Strawser, admitted he abused the child and said his wife did not know anything about it. While he abused the child, Strawser stuck his finger down the boy's throat to silence the child. That caused a massive infection and resulted in the death.

Strawser was convicted of first-degree murder and two felony counts of child abuse. He is serving a life term without possibility of parole plus 40 years.

"We conclude that the evidence and the applicable law do not support a finding that Labastida directly committed acts or aided and abetted Strawser in the commission of acts so as to warrant her conviction of second-degree murder," the court said in taking the new look at the mother's case.

In its first decision the court said the mother could have been convicted of first-degree murder but that the District Court jury may have been lenient in finding her guilty of only second-degree murder.

The ruling Monday said, "The evidence clearly established that Strawser, not Labastida, personally inflicted the child's fatal injuries. Labastida's mere presence in the home, without more, is insufficient as a matter of law to support her conviction as an aider and abettor."

Maybe Labastida should have known "her son was in mortal danger," the court said. "But that is not the same as finding that she actually knew, which is the finding necessary to support a conviction for aiding and abetting murder."

The court also said there was not enough evidence to support a finding that Labastida had the criminal intent required for a murder conviction.