76 So. 3d 1274
La. Ct. App.2011Background
- On October 8, 2008, Kesiah Melbert was shot multiple times after Defendant blocked her car and fired through windows.
- Defendant, ex-boyfriend of the victim, retrieved possessions from the shared apartment including a dog; dispute over the dog preceded the incident.
- Defendant was convicted on January 29, 2010 of attempted second degree murder and aggravated assault with a firearm.
- Habitual offender proceedings occurred separately; Defendant was found to be a third felony offender and sentenced to life imprisonment without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension.
- On appeal, Defendant argues the evidence was insufficient; the appeal also addresses errors patent regarding sentencing and post-conviction advisement.
- The appellate court vacates the habitual offender sentence, remands for resentencing with count-specific enhancement clarity, and instructs notice of Art. 930.8 responsibilities at resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for attempted second degree murder | Jones argued no specific intent to kill proven. | Insufficient proof of specific intent to kill. | Sufficient evidence to prove attempted second degree murder. |
| Habitual offender sentencing on multiple counts | One indeterminate sentence purportedlyenhanced both convictions. | Need for separate sentencing on each conviction. | Habitual offender sentence vacated; remand for count-specific resentencing. |
| Post-conviction advisement under Article 930.8 | Advisement requirements may have been satisfied. | Advisement not shown; required by statute. | Remand to advise on Article 930.8 post-conviction relief period. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Bessonette, 574 So.2d 1305 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1991) (sentence on all counts must reflect conviction specifics)
- State v. Webster, 664 So.2d 624 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1995) (clarifies requirement to sentence on each conviction when enhancing)
- State v. Macon, 957 So.2d 1280 (La. 2007) (Jackson standard of review for sufficiency of evidence)
- State v. Thomas, 48 So.3d 1210 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2010) (specific intent can be inferred from shooting multiple times)
- State v. Pierre, 854 So.2d 945 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2003) (firing at victim supports inference of intent to kill)
- State v. Reed, 809 So.2d 1261 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2002) (precedent on multiple-shot evidence and intent)
- State v. Clark, 643 So.2d 463 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1994) (reiterates intent inference from firing at victim)