180 So. 3d 465
La. Ct. App.2015Background
- Early morning, Jan. 7, 2012: officers responded to shots at a residence; Ernest J. Apodaca fired a shotgun at Officer Danny Frasier and Chief Johnny Moss, striking Frasier's shoulder and damaging both patrol vehicles.
- A multi-hour standoff followed during which Apodaca continued firing into the air and making threats; SWAT used a flash-bang to secure and arrest him.
- Apodaca was charged with two counts of attempted first-degree murder (attacks on peace officers) and two counts of aggravated criminal damage to property. He pled not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity; a sanity commission found him competent to stand trial.
- At trial witnesses (officers and a trooper) testified about being fired upon, vehicle damage, and post-arrest statements by Apodaca admitting he intended to kill officers. The jury convicted on all counts.
- At sentencing the court reviewed a PSI, considered Apodaca’s age, lack of priors, mental health and suicide attempts, but emphasized the gravity of attacking peace officers; it imposed concurrent terms: 35 years hard labor (each attempted murder count, no benefits) and 5 years hard labor (each aggravated damage count). Appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Apodaca's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for attempted 1st-degree murder | Intoxication and suicidal intent meant he lacked the specific intent to kill; he only sought "suicide by cop." | Actions (aiming and firing at officers), admissions after arrest, and continued threats support specific intent to kill. | Convictions affirmed: evidence (shots aimed at occupied police units and admissions) supports specific intent beyond a reasonable doubt. |
| Sufficiency for aggravated criminal damage to property | Damage was minimal and weapon/shells from ~30 yards made endangerment of life not foreseeable. | Pellets damaged occupied moving patrol units and injured an officer; endangerment of life was foreseeable. | Convictions affirmed: damage to occupied vehicles rendered endangerment foreseeable. |
| Voluntary intoxication defense to specific intent | Intoxication precluded formation of specific intent. | No proof of degree of intoxication; defendant was coherent enough to plan and act; State must disprove defense. | Rejected: jury could find intoxication did not preclude specific intent. |
| Excessive sentence claim | 50-year-old first offender with suicide attempts and mental-health history; shots fired from a distance and limited damage warrant lesser sentence. | Statutory sentencing range permits severe terms for attempted murder of peace officer; trial court considered mitigating factors and imposed mid‑range concurrent sentences. | Sentences affirmed: trial court complied with sentencing guidelines and sentences were not grossly disproportionate or excessive. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency review)
- State v. Seals, 684 So.2d 368 (specific intent inferred from discharging firearm aimed at a person)
- State v. Mickelson, 149 So.3d 178 (voluntary intoxication is a defense to specific-intent offenses but burden rules explained)
- State v. Lanclos, 419 So.2d 475 (articulation requirement for sentencing; factual basis suffices even without rigid recitation)
- State v. Dorthey, 623 So.2d 1276 (excessiveness standard: sentence unconstitutional if grossly disproportionate)