State of Louisiana Versus Maurice T. Leach AKA "marlo", 356 So.3d 531

On May 25, 2019, Michael Shawn Brown was shot and killed inside the Pair of Dice Lounge in Metairie; autopsy found an intermediate-range gunshot to the head and toxicology showing high levels of cocaine and cocaethylene.
Surveillance video and eyewitnesses placed Maurice T. Leach (aka "Marlo") at the scene near the victim; photographic lineups identified Leach as the shooter.
Leach was arrested in New Jersey; he gave a Mirandized statement admitting he fired one shot after alleging Brown threatened him and reached into his pocket; Leach said he disposed of the gun nearby.
No firearm was recovered; prosecution presented video/witness testimony contradicting Leach’s claim that Brown was armed or reached for a weapon.
A jury convicted Leach of manslaughter (lesser included) and obstruction of justice; the court sentenced him to 35 years at hard labor for manslaughter, concurrent with a 25-year sentence for obstruction.
Post-trial motions for new trial and post-verdict judgment of acquittal were denied; Leach appealed arguing insufficient evidence (self-defense) and excessive sentence.

Issue	State's Argument	Leach's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to support manslaughter conviction / rejection of self-defense	Evidence (video, eyewitness IDs, autopsy range, circumstances) permitted reasonable inference of culpability; jury credibility determinations control	Leach claims he reasonably feared imminent death/serious harm (victim threatened him, previously stabbed, victim was high and had a knife) — thus justifiable homicide	Court affirmed: viewing evidence in State’s favor, rational juror could reject self-defense and convict; denial of post-verdict acquittal/new trial upheld
Excessiveness of 35‑year sentence	Court considered case facts, victim impact, PSI, and lack of remorse; sentence within discretion	Leach urged youth, no violent record, remorse, rehabilitation; argued minimum sentence should apply	Court found no abuse of discretion; sentence not excessive

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (sets federal standard for sufficiency review)
State v. Lane, 310 So.3d 794 (deference to factfinder in credibility and inferences)
State v. Clifton, 248 So.3d 691 (deference to jury credibility calls)
State v. Caffrey, 15 So.3d 198 (weight of evidence vs sufficiency distinction)
State v. Bailey, 875 So.2d 949 (trier of fact may accept or reject testimony)
State v. Dixon, 982 So.2d 146 (circumstantial-evidence instruction)
State v. Gatson, 334 So.3d 1021 (circumstantial evidence and reasonable hypotheses of innocence)
State v. Williams, 904 So.2d 830 (definition and role of circumstantial evidence)
State v. Wooten, 738 So.2d 672 (application of reasonable-hypotheses test)
State v. Condley, 904 So.2d 881 (new-trial standards and appellate review)
State v. Daniels, 176 So.3d 735 (limits on "ends of justice" new-trial claims)
State v. Mouton, 219 So.3d 1244 (trial court discretion on new trial/post-verdict motions)
State v. Bazley, 60 So.3d 7 (post-verdict acquittal standard)
State v. Durand, 963 So.2d 1028 (Jackson standard applied on appeal)