State v. Cousin, 240 So. 3d 954

Defendant Desmond Herbert Cousin was convicted by a jury of bank fraud (La. R.S. 14:71.1) for attempting to cash a fraudulent Select Stone, LLC check for $1,929 at a Capital One teller in Mandeville.
Teller noticed multiple irregularities (different fonts, purple check, incorrect routing number placement, misspelling of payor’s name), confirmed fraud with the company’s bookkeeper, and called police after which defendant was arrested outside the bank.
Defendant did not testify; defense attempted to suggest an alternative theory that a third party ("Travis Davis") gave him the check, but produced no corroborating evidence.
Following conviction the court sentenced Cousin to six years at hard labor; the State filed a habitual-offender bill, and the defendant admitted the allegations at the habitual hearing.
The trial court adjudicated Cousin a third-felony habitual offender, vacated the six-year sentence, and imposed an enhanced eight-year sentence without probation or suspension.
On appeal the conviction was affirmed, but the habitual-offender adjudication and enhanced sentence were vacated because the court failed to advise Cousin of his right to remain silent and the State presented no documentary proof of prior convictions at the habitual hearing; the original six-year sentence was reinstated and the case remanded.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence: whether State proved specific intent to commit bank fraud	State: teller testimony and check irregularities permit inference of specific intent to deceive and obtain funds	Cousin: single check, possible belief it was legitimately issued (Travis Davis theory); no proof he knew it was fraudulent	Court: Affirmed conviction — viewing evidence in State’s favor, jurors reasonably inferred specific intent and rejected defense hypothesis
Habitual-offender proceedings: whether advisements and proof requirements were satisfied before accepting stipulation and enhancing sentence	State: proceeded after defendant’s counsel waived reading and defendant admitted prior convictions	Cousin: trial court failed to inform him of right to remain silent and he was denied a valid opportunity to contest habitual allegations; State presented no proof at hearing	Court: Vacated habitual adjudication and enhanced sentence — defendant not advised of right to remain silent and State produced no competent documentary proof at hearing; original sentence reinstated

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (establishes standard for review of evidentiary sufficiency)
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (right to remain silent and advisement principles invoked in discussing habitual proceedings)
State v. Forbs, 983 So.2d 954 (discusses intent standard for bank fraud and similarity to federal bank fraud statute)
United States v. Green, 745 F.2d 1205 (scheme reasonably calculated to deceive shows requisite intent)
State v. Calloway, 1 So.3d 417 (application of reasonable-hypothesis-of-innocence rule in circumstantial-evidence cases)