State v. Alexander, 118 So. 3d 1138

Defendant Jamar-io R. Alexander was convicted by jury of second degree murder and felon in possession of a firearm.
Indictment charged second degree murder under La. Rev. Stat. 14:30.1 and felon-in-possession under La. Rev. Stat. 14:95.1.
Evidence showed cab fare linked to defendant, DNA on helmet and gloves, and fingerprints on the cab window tying him to the scene.
Defendant admitted shooting the victim in recorded statements; trial included expert testimony on ballistic and DNA results.
Defendant appealed after convictions and sentences; issues centered on sufficiency, trial errors, and discovery of new evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence for possession of a firearm by a felon	Alexander possessed the gun found in the apartment closet.	No direct or constructive possession proven; gun not owned or controlled by him.	Evidence supports possession by constructive possession.
Sufficiency of the evidence for second degree murder	State proved specific intent or armed-robbery theory beyond a reasonable doubt.	Evidence insufficient; reliance on circumstantial evidence and lack of shooter identification.	Specific intent to kill established; murder upheld under Jackson standard.
Motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence	New evidence would not change verdict; evidence cumulative.	Victim’s scheduled IG appointment would support defense theory.	No abuse of discretion; four-part test not satisfied; denial affirmed.
Mistrial/relief for juror-emotional prejudice	No jurors saw the outburst; no prejudice shown.	Outburst prejudiced fair trial; mistrial warranted.	No reversible error; no abuse of discretion; trial deemed fair.
Defendant's right to testify	Counsel did not compel testimony; defendant’s right preserved.	Right to testify violated or waived improperly without record support.	No violation; Hampton guidelines not triggered; right to testify not violated.

State v. Hearold, 603 So.2d 731 (La. 1992) (guides sufficiency review and application of Jackson v. Virginia)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1979) (defining standard for sufficiency of evidence)
State v. Neal, 796 So.2d 649 (La. 2001) (discusses circumstantial evidence and standard of review)
State v. Mitchell, 772 So.2d 78 (La. 2000) (circumstantial evidence instructions and reasonable hypotheses)
State v. Washington, 866 So.2d 973 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2004) (provides framework for circumstantial-evidence review)
State v. Lande, 934 So.2d 280 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2006) (post-verdict review and sufficiency considerations)
State v. Allen, 440 So.2d 1330 (La. 1983) (general principles cited for evidentiary review)
State v. Day, 410 So.2d 741 (La. 1982) (constructive possession standard for firearms)
State v. Rowan, 694 So.2d 1052 (La. App. 5th Cir. 1997) (credibility of witnesses within tribunal’s discretion)
State v. Touchet, 642 So.2d 1213 (La. 1994) (standards for appointment of experts in indigent defense)
Chairs, 106 So.3d 1232 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2012) (emotional displays in court and mistrial likelihood)
Rock v. Arkansas, 483 U.S. 44 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1987) (right to testify considerations in criminal trials)