184 So. 3d 241
La. Ct. App.2016Background
- On Sept. 23, 2013, Marcus Joel Smith entered Carolyn Caskey’s parked car at a Walmart, pointed what she believed was a firearm, demanded money, and fled when she sounded her horn; Caskey identified Smith at the scene.
- Police recovered a firearm, gloves, mask, and stockings from a restaurant trash can; DNA testing matched Smith to the gloves and stockings but not the firearm or mask.
- Smith admitted entering the car and demanding money but denied possessing a weapon (said he held a phone wrapped in a rag); he gave a buccal swab and was arrested.
- Smith was charged with attempted armed robbery (La. R.S. 14:27; 14:64; 14:64.3), convicted by a jury, and sentenced to 40 years at hard labor with credit for time served.
- PSI revealed Smith is a fourth-felony offender with a lengthy, violent criminal history (including prior armed robbery and offenses committed while on parole); he refused to cooperate with the PSI investigator.
- Smith appealed solely on the ground that his 40-year sentence is constitutionally excessive.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 40-year sentence is constitutionally excessive | Smith: 40 years for attempted armed robbery is essentially a life term for a 43‑year‑old and is purposeless pain and suffering | State: Sentence is within statutory range; trial court followed La. C. Cr. P. art. 894.1 and relied on record and PSI showing violent prior history | Affirmed — sentence is within statutory range and not grossly disproportionate |
| Whether appellate review is constrained by failure to move for sentence reconsideration | Smith argued excessive generally | State relied on La. C. Cr. P. art. 881.1 limiting appellate review where no motion to reconsider filed | Court limited review to constitutional excessiveness only (bare claim) |
| Whether defendant’s uncooperativeness with PSI renders reliance on PSI improper | Smith implied mitigating info missing makes sentence excessive | State: court may rely on PSI even if defendant withheld info | Court: uncooperative behavior does not make reliance on PSI improper; sentencing valid |
| Whether trial court’s failure to state sentence is to be without benefits requires remand | Smith noted omission | State cited statute making omission harmless | Court held omission harmless under La. R.S. 15:301.1(A) and ordered sentence to be served without probation, parole, or suspension of sentence; minutes to be amended |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Mims, 619 So.2d 1059 (La. 1993) (appellate review limited where no motion to reconsider sentence)
- State v. Lobato, 603 So.2d 739 (La. 1992) (constitutional excessiveness standard)
- State v. Dorthey, 623 So.2d 1276 (La. 1993) (sentence unconstitutional if grossly out of proportion or purposeless infliction of pain)
- State v. Weaver, 805 So.2d 166 (La. 2002) (gross disproportionality analysis)
- State v. Simms, 505 So.2d 981 (La. Ct. App. 1987) (court may rely on PSI missing mitigating info when defendant was uncooperative)
- State v. Williams, 800 So.2d 790 (La. 2001) (failure to state lack of benefits in oral sentence is harmless; statutory requirement still applies)
- State v. Pugh, 911 So.2d 898 (La. Ct. App. 2005) (timing rules for post-conviction relief filings)
Disposition: Conviction and 40‑year sentence (to be served at hard labor without probation, parole, or suspension of sentence; credit for time served) affirmed.