State v. Efferson, 259 So. 3d 1153

Defendant McKinley Efferson shot and killed Reginald Wess in the family home between 2:00–3:00 a.m.; defendant admitted using his mother’s 9 mm handgun and three projectiles were recovered from the victim.
Victim lived with defendant’s mother and the defendant for about 4½ years; defendant described prior assaultive incidents between himself and the victim.
Police found the murder weapon under defendant’s mattress and shell casings in his clothing hamper; victim died at hospital; autopsy showed multiple potentially fatal wounds.
Defendant was charged with second-degree murder, convicted by jury of manslaughter (a responsive verdict), and sentenced to 36 years at hard labor.
Before trial the court excluded evidence under La. C.E. art. 404(A)(2)’s “domestic violence exception,” ruling it inapplicable because the victim and defendant did not have a familial relationship; defendant did not proffer the excluded evidence.
On appeal Efferson challenged (1) exclusion of victim-character evidence under Art. 404(A)(2) and (2) alleged an excessive sentence; the court affirmed conviction and sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of victim's "dangerous character" under La. C.E. art. 404(A)(2)	State: exclusion proper because defendant/victim were not in a familial/intimate relationship and no hostile demonstration at time of offense.	Efferson: relationship was "familial" ("stepfather-stepson type") so the domestic-violence exception should allow admission.	Court: Affirmed exclusion; defendant waived review by failing to proffer; moreover jury nonetheless heard prior-incident testimony, so no showing of substantial prejudice.
Excessiveness of 36-year sentence for manslaughter	State: within statutory range and trial court may consider that evidence could have supported 2nd-degree murder.	Efferson: sentence is cruel, excessive, usurps jury's role and will not further penal goals.	Court: Sentence not excessive; within discretion, not grossly disproportionate, and defendant benefited from lesser manslaughter verdict.

State v. Johnson, 940 So.2d 711 (La. App. 2d Cir.) (prosecution must disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt)
State v. Leger, 936 So.2d 108 (La. 2006) (burden on defendant to prove provocation to reduce murder to manslaughter by preponderance)
State v. Magee, 103 So.3d 285 (La. 2012) (need for proffer to preserve exclusion-of-evidence claim under La. C.E. art. 103)
State v. George, 768 So.2d 748 (La. App. 2d Cir.) (trial court may consider that evidence could support greater offense when sentencing on a responsive verdict)
State v. White, 136 So.3d 280 (La. App. 2d Cir.) (same; sentencing may reflect that defendant benefited from lesser verdict)
State v. Jasper, 677 So.2d 553 (La. App. 2d Cir.) (affirming lengthy sentence for manslaughter when evidence could have supported murder)
State v. Shaikh, 236 So.3d 1206 (La.) (constitutional excessive-sentence standard)
State v. Griffin, 180 So.3d 1262 (La.) (excessive-sentence review standard)
State v. Williams, 893 So.2d 7 (La.) (wide sentencing discretion; appellate review limited to abuse of discretion)