128 So. 3d 1156
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- Defendant Dedrick Marshall and victim Iesha Wells were long-term partners with children; Marshall repeatedly accused Wells of infidelity.
- On June 6, 2012, Marshall assaulted Wells (punching, hair-pulling), cut off parts of her hair with a knife, slashed her vehicle’s four tires, and threatened that if he could not have her no one could; Wells escaped to a neighbor’s house and police arrested Marshall nearby.
- The State charged Marshall with second-degree battery and attempted false imprisonment while armed; he was convicted and sentenced to concurrent three-year hard labor terms.
- Before trial the State filed and the court granted a La. C.E. art. 404(B)(1) notice to introduce prior domestic incidents between Marshall and Wells (an August 2005 incident and a February 2006 guilty plea for domestic assault).
- Marshall appealed solely arguing the trial court erred by admitting the other-crimes evidence under La. C.E. art. 404(B)(1) and that admission was not harmless.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of other-crimes evidence under La. C.E. art. 404(B)(1) | Other-crimes evidence is admissible to show motive, intent, system, or identity and the State provided notice and similar facts supporting relevance | Admission was improper because the prior acts only showed bad character and were unfairly prejudicial | Court upheld admission: prior acts were independently relevant to show motive and the volatile, repetitive pattern toward this victim; probative value outweighed prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.) (requirements for notice and particularity for other-crimes evidence)
- Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (U.S.) (State must prove other-act allegations by a preponderance of the evidence for admissibility)
- State v. Jackson, 625 So.2d 146 (La.) (other-act evidence must have independent relevance such as motive or intent)
- State v. Lafleur, 398 So.2d 1074 (La.) (motive evidence must be factually particular to victim and charged crime)
- State v. Walker, 394 So.2d 1181 (La.) (prior bad temper and poor relationship may be relevant to show commission of the offense)
- State v. Rose, 949 So.2d 1236 (La.) (evidence of motive must be particular to victim and charged offense)