268 So. 3d 346
La. Ct. App.2019Background
- Brittney McGill and Gabrielle “Gabby” Cooper, former friends, fought over ownership/use of a jointly purchased car; prior tensions and prior fistfights were established at trial.
- On April 13, 2015, an on-yard fistfight escalated; after apparent pauses Gabby began to leave and Brittney pursued her onto the street and fatally stabbed Gabby in the chest.
- Multiple eyewitnesses and cellphone videos placed Brittney as the stabber; police recovered the knife from the house.
- Brittney gave a recorded statement admitting she stabbed Gabby, claiming self-defense and defense of her unborn child; jail calls suggested witness coaching.
- Gabby died from a penetrating stab wound to the heart; Brittney was indicted for second-degree murder, convicted of manslaughter, and sentenced to 22 years at hard labor.
- On appeal Brittney challenged (1) sufficiency of evidence to disprove self-defense/defense of others, (2) refusal to give a special jury instruction on defense of others (re: unborn child), and (3) excessiveness of sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (McGill) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the state disproved self-defense/defense of others beyond a reasonable doubt | The evidence and videos show the fight had ended, Gabby was withdrawing, Brittney pursued and stabbed her; no weapon or imminent deadly threat from Gabby | Brittney claims she reasonably feared for her life and her unborn child and acted to prevent harm | Affirmed: jury reasonably rejected self-defense/defense-of-others; sufficiency supports manslaughter conviction |
| Whether the court erred by refusing a special jury charge on defense of others (unborn child) | General jury instructions adequately covered statutory justifiable homicide; requested charge would need undue qualification given weak evidentiary support | Requested instruction on defense of others (including defense of unborn child) should have been given because McGill asserted that defense | No reversible error: court’s general instructions covered justifiable homicide; defense-of-others charge not required given lack of evidence and need for qualification |
| Whether failure to instruct on the four reasonableness factors was reversible error | The general charge covered the elements and stand-your-ground doctrine; omission of enumerated factors was harmless | Omission of the four specific factors undermined jury’s evaluation of reasonableness | Held harmless: factors substantially covered; no prejudice shown |
| Whether the 22-year sentence is constitutionally excessive | Sentence within statutory limits for manslaughter (max 40 years); court considered sentencing factors and victim impact; midrange sentence appropriate | 22 years is excessive given lack of violent history and defendant’s remorse | Affirmed: sentence not grossly disproportionate or a manifest abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Lensey, 182 So.3d 1059 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2015) (factors for assessing self-defense reasonableness and burden on state)
- State v. Johnson, 940 So.2d 711 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2006) (self-defense burden and retreat considerations)
- State v. Casey, 775 So.2d 1022 (La. 2000) (factfinder’s credibility determinations)
- State v. Smith, 661 So.2d 442 (La. 1995) (appellate courts do not reweigh evidence/assess credibility)
- State v. Lanclos, 419 So.2d 475 (La. 1982) (sentencing: articulation of factual basis under La. C. Cr. P. art. 894.1)
- State v. Williams, 893 So.2d 7 (La. 2004) (standard for constitutional excessiveness review)