81 So. 3d 944
La. Ct. App.2011Background
- Defendant Christopher Marlowe was charged by information with attempted second-degree murder by shooting Erik Beelman.
- Trial proceedings began June 2009; mistrial declared after jurors failed to reach verdict; retried September 2009 and found guilty as charged.
- Sentenced November 19, 2009 to twenty years at hard labor without probation or suspension.
- Daubert hearing occurred to address Greg Meyer’s proposed use-of-force testimony; Meyer's testimony was excluded.
- Defense presented Dr. Bruce Wainer as an expert on forensic pathology who rebutted intoxication and memory issues.
- Court corrected a patent sentencing error, clarifying that the sentence must be served without parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a mistrial was properly declared and maintained | State argues mistrial declaration was proper and final. | Marlowe argues the court improperly declared mistrial and later resumed trial. | Mistrial effectively concluded; subsequent proceedings were improper; but court rationale affirmed on review. |
| Whether prosecutor's closing remarks improperly appealed to racial prejudice | State contends comments were within closing argument scope and harmless. | Marlowe contends comments invoked racial prejudice warranting mistrial. | No reversible error; any prejudice was harmless given overall record. |
| Whether the trial court properly excluded Meyer's Daubert-qualified expert testimony | State contends Meyer’s testimony would aid jury on use-of-force issues. | Marlowe argues Meyer is qualified and his testimony could assist self-defense theory. | Court did not abuse discretion; exclusion was proper under Daubert/Article 702; any error harmless. |
| Whether Beelman’s alleged prostitution evidence was admissible under res gestae/404(B) | State asserts evidence relevant to context of the incident. | Marlowe argues it shows Beelman’s bad character and is admissible as res gestae/404(B). | Trial court’s ruling sustained; evidence not admitted; no reversible error. |
| Whether rebuttal reference to cab driver on 911 tape improperly vouched for witnesses | State contends rebuttal comments were within closing and supported by the tape. | Marlowe argues comments exceeded evidence and impermissibly vouched for prosecution. | Harmless error; verdict not attributable to the remark; conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Williams, 800 So.2d 790 (La. 2001) (statutory execution of parole restrictions self-activates)
- State v. Dupre, 339 So.2d 10 (La. 1976) (contemporaneous objection rule; mistrial context)
- Kaufman v. State, 278 So.2d 86 (La. 1972) (racial references in closing arguments require mistrial beyond mere admonition)
- Wilson v. Town of Mamou, 972 So.2d 461 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2007) (racially charged closing remarks require reversal when prejudicial)
- State v. Colomb, 747 So.2d 1074 (La. 1999) (res gestae/integral act evidence requires close connexity to complete story of crime)
- Estate of Francis v. City of Rayne, 966 So.2d 1105 (La. App. 3 Cir. 2007) (use-of-force expert testimony admissibility context)
- Foret v. State, 628 So.2d 1116 (La. 1993) (Daubert gatekeeping for reliability of expert testimony)
- Graham v. Connor, 1888 U.S. (cited context) (U.S. Supreme Court (referenced)) (framework for use-of-force evaluation (contextual backdrop))
- Higginbotham, 60 So.3d 621 (La. 2011) (harmless error analysis applying to closing argument errors)