169 So. 3d 558
La. Ct. App.2015Background
- On July 25, 2013, Byron Matthews picked up his two young children and stopped in front of his mother’s apartment; as he approached the rear passenger door, shots were fired and his two-year-old son was struck in the face.
- Defendant Carl Baham (nickname “Dooney”) was identified by Matthews in a photo lineup and at trial as the shooter; investigators recovered 9mm ammunition at Baham’s residence consistent with casings from the scene.
- Baham gave multiple recorded statements: initially denying presence, then claiming he was shot at (by a man with an AK‑47) and fired back in self‑defense; his girlfriend testified Baham fired first and no one else had a gun.
- Forensic testimony was consistent with a single firearm being used; no AK‑47 brass or other evidence corroborated Baham’s claim of an AK‑47 at the scene.
- A jury convicted Baham of attempted second‑degree murder (victim: Matthews) and two counts of illegal use of a weapon while committing a crime of violence (victim: Matthews’ two children); he received 50 years (attempt), 20 years (weapon count concurrent), and 10 years (weapon count consecutive) — total 60 years.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for not calling Baham to testify | State: counsel’s strategy was reasonable; record negates need for defendant’s testimony | Baham: counsel was ineffective for not calling him to support self‑defense and prior acquaintance with Matthews | Court: Counsel not ineffective; strategy reasonable, self‑defense presented via statements and other witnesses, testimony likely lacked credibility |
| Sufficiency of evidence / self‑defense | State: evidence (identification, statements, ballistics) proves intent and negates self‑defense | Baham: he acted in self‑defense; Matthews was aggressor and known to Baham | Held: Evidence sufficient; jury could reject self‑defense; specific intent inferred from pointing/firing; transferred intent applies to injured child |
| Excessive sentence | Baham: 50/20/10 (60 yrs) is grossly excessive given first offender status and claimed self‑defense | State: sentences within statutory limits and justified by seriousness, child injured, danger to community | Held: Sentences not excessive; within statutory ranges; record supports consecutive term; no abuse of discretion |
| Perjured testimony claim | Baham: Matthews perjured himself about not knowing shooter | State: no record evidence Matthews lied; other evidence supports Matthews’ account | Held: No basis to disturb credibility determination; jury entitled to believe State’s witnesses |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence)
- State v. Hoffman, 768 So.2d 542 (La. 2000) (specific intent may be inferred from pointing and firing a gun)
- State v. Mitchell, 772 So.2d 78 (La. 2000) (standard for circumstantial evidence and alternative hypotheses)
- State v. Smith, 839 So.2d 1 (La. 2003) (constitutional prohibition on excessive sentences)
- State v. Taylor, 887 So.2d 589 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2004) (ineffective assistance claims often resolved in post‑conviction but may be addressed on appeal when record sufficient)