59 So. 3d 1270
La. Ct. App.2011Background
- Hunter was charged with obscenity under La. R.S. 14:106; convicted by a six-person jury on May 5, 2010; sentenced May 13, 2010 to three years at hard labor, consecutive to juvenile-detention time.
- Facts show Hunter, while housed at Bridge City Center for Youth, masturbated in front of a supervisor at 1:30 a.m., exposed an erect penis, and made lewd comments while being filmed on security footage.
- Supervisor Charles reported the incident; prior masturbation incidents were reported but not to police.
- Appellant challenges the sentence on grounds of excessiveness and argues trial judge was predisposed to impose the maximum term, with inadequate reasons under Article 894.1.
- Record on appeal lacks evidence of Hunter’s criminal history; the sentencing minute states a guilty plea, but the record shows a conviction after trial, creating a discrepancy to be corrected upon resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the three-year consecutive sentence is constitutionally excessive | Hunter argues the judge was predisposed and the sentence is excessive. | Hunter contends the sentence is not supported by the record and violates sentencing criteria. | Sentence vacated; remanded for resentencing; excessiveness review deferred until record complete. |
| Whether pretrial sentencing discussions satisfy Article 881.1 | Pretrial discussions should satisfy Article 881.1 grounds for reconsideration. | Counsel argued for sentencing considerations before trial; objections were premature. | Defendant limited to constitutional excessiveness review; pretrial discussions do not satisfy Article 881.1 A(1). |
| Whether the consecutive nature of the sentence can be reviewed for excessiveness | Consecutive sentences can be reviewed for excessiveness if individually excessive. | Challenge to consecutiveness as part of overall excessiveness claim. | Not reached on remand; residual review deferred until proper record and resentencing. |
| Whether the record properly reflects Hunter's criminal history | Trial court relied on Hunter's juvenile history to justify punishment. | Record lacks evidence of the nature/extent of criminal history; this must be clarified. | Remand to complete the record with defendant's criminal history. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Nguyen, 958 So. 2d 61 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2007) (constitutional excessiveness standard for disproportional punishment)
- State v. Dorsey, 960 So.2d 1127 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2007) (broad trial-court discretion in sentencing; abuse of discretion standard on review)
- State v. Pearson, 975 So.2d 646 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2007) (appellate review of excessiveness; record support required)
- State v. Stacker, 836 So.2d 601 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2002) (maximum sentences reserved for the most serious offenses and offenders)
- State v. Badeaux, 798 So.2d 234 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2001) (bare constitutional review of consecutive sentences when indiv. excessiveness argued)
- State v. Fuller, 980 So.2d 45 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2008) (prematurity of motion to reconsider sentence; Art. 881.1 limitations)