73 So. 3d 1021
La. Ct. App.2011Background
- Esque was convicted of three counts of molestation of a juvenile under La. R.S. 14:81.2.
- Sentences: 20 years on count 1, 15 years on count 2, and 15 years on count 3, to run consecutively.
- Victims were B.T. (2008) and C.H. (1986–1990) and D.H. (1989); acts included touching genitals and rubbing.
- Trial court considered La. C. Cr. P. art. 894.1 factors and found aggravating circumstances, lack of mitigating factors.
- Judge noted the defendant’s long history of abuse and risk of reoffending; imposed maximum terms on all counts.
- Appellate court affirmed convictions and sentences as within statutory guidelines and not grossly excessive.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 50-year consecutive sentence is excessive | State contends the sentences reflect seriousness and victim impact | Esque argues the total sentence is grossly disproportionate given age and circumstances | Not excessive; sentences upheld within guidelines |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Williams, 893 So.2d 7 (La. 2004) (appellate review of trial court discretion in sentencing)
- State v. Smith, 433 So.2d 688 (La.1983) (art. 894.1 factors and sentencing rationale)
- State v. Lathan, 953 So.2d 890 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2007) (consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors)
- State v. Shumaker, 945 So.2d 277 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2006) (record must reflect adequate factual basis under art. 894.1)
- State v. Dorthey, 623 So.2d 1276 (La.1993) (constitutional excessiveness standard)
- State v. Weaver, 805 So.2d 166 (La.2002) (gross disproportionality analysis)
- State v. Lobato, 603 So.2d 739 (La.1992) (proportionality and sentencing considerations)
- State v. Bradford, 691 So.2d 864 (La.App. 2 Cir. 1997) (maximal sentences reserved for worst offenses)
- State v. McKinney, 976 So.2d 802 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2008) (consecutivity and discretion in sentencing)