State v. McGhee, 179 So. 3d 739

Jessica Guillot disappeared in September 2013; her body was never found. Chadwick McGhee was indicted for second-degree kidnapping; jury convicted him of the lesser-included offense of simple kidnapping.
Key eyewitness was co-defendant Tamika Williams, who testified she saw Bentley choke the victim in the back of a Durango but admitted she did not see all events and had made prior inconsistent statements and had a plea deal.
Other witnesses (victim’s mother, fiancé, and a bystander) placed McGhee with Bentley when Bentley was looking for the victim and testified the victim’s house was ransacked. No forensic evidence tied McGhee to the car or victim.
McGhee gave a recorded statement denying involvement; detectives testified waivers were given and no promises or threats were made.
Trial court denied McGhee’s new-trial motion and admitted co-defendant out-of-court statements; McGhee was later adjudicated a habitual offender and sentenced to life (sentencing appeal handled separately).
On appeal the court considered sufficiency of the evidence, denial of new trial, and admission of co-defendant statements; it vacated McGhee’s conviction for insufficient evidence and deemed other issues moot.

Issue	State's Argument	McGhee's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence to convict McGhee as a principal to simple kidnapping	Evidence showed McGhee was present with Bentley, Bentley committed kidnapping, and a statement by Bentley to McGhee ("Whatever I tell you to do, you do it") supports aiding/abetting liability	Only showed McGhee’s presence; no evidence he seized, carried, counseled, procured, or knowingly aided the kidnapping (no proof of McGhee’s requisite criminal intent)	Vacated conviction: State failed to prove McGhee had requisite intent to be a principal; presence alone insufficient
Denial of motion for new trial (based on verdict contrary to law/evidence and alleged newly discovered evidence about Williams)	Trial court record and testimony supported denying new trial; reliability of Williams’ testimony for jury determination	Argued verdict contrary to evidence and new evidence about Williams warranted new trial	Moot (not reached) because conviction vacated
Admission of out-of-court statements by co-defendant (Confrontation/right to cross-examine)	Statements were admissible for reasons argued at trial (prosecution’s position)	Admission violated confrontation if statements used against McGhee without opportunity for cross-examination of declarant	Moot (not reached) because conviction vacated

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for evaluating sufficiency of the evidence: whether any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
State v. Brooks, 505 So.2d 714 (La. 1987) (an individual may be convicted as a principal only for crimes for which he personally has the requisite mental state)
State v. Holmes, 388 So.2d 722 (La. 1980) (intent of one co-defendant cannot be imputed to another)
State v. Mitchell, 772 So.2d 78 (La. 2000) (appellate review must determine whether an alternative hypothesis makes conviction unreasonable under Jackson)
State v. Kennerson, 695 So.2d 1367 (La. App. 3 Cir.) (articulates standard of review for sufficiency claims on appeal)
State v. Schwander, 346 So.2d 1173 (La. 1977) (rejects guilt by association as basis for conviction)
State v. Jackson, 344 So.2d 961 (La. 1977) (discusses misprision and its status in Louisiana law)