131 So. 3d 1070
La. Ct. App.2013Background
- Defendant Michael Videau appeals seven convictions for sex offenses against five child victims, arguing confrontation, sufficiency, appellate record, and counsel issues.
- Convictions arose from trials in January 2013; video interviews of victims were admitted over defense objections; J.S.L. did not testify due to age.
- Victims: T.L. (Counts 1–3), J.S.L. (Count 5, mother of Counts 4–5), J.L. (Count 4), I.L. (Count 7), H.J. (Count 6).
- Evidence included CAC interviews and medical examinations; Dr. Jaime Jackson testified about common delayed disclosure and lack of physical findings.
- Post-trial, the court denied a new trial; sentences ranged from 10 years to life to 99 years, with concurrent terms and a non-parole provision on Count 4.
- The court issued an errors patent remand requiring written sex-offender notification and a reminder about the prescriptive period for post-conviction relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence | State contends the victims’ testimony, plus CAC and medical evidence, proves every element beyond reasonable doubt. | Videau argues internal inconsistencies and lack of corroboration render the evidence insufficient. | Evidence sufficient; single- and multiple-victim testimony supports the offenses. |
| Confrontation Clause—admission of videotape | State asserts admissibility under statute and that cross-examination limits were preserved. | Videau contends J.S.L.’s videotaped interview violated confrontation rights because she could not answer detailed questions. | Issue not preserved for appellate review; defense failed to object contemporaneously; barred under Article 841. |
| Incomplete record and appellate counsel effectiveness | Record deficiencies do not bar review; counsel not ineffective for relying on an incomplete transcript. | Record omissions and counsel performance prejudiced the appeal; counsel was ineffective. | Record adequate for review; no ineffective-assistance showing; issues meritless. |
| Errors patent and remand obligations | Convictions require correction for errors patent related to sex-offender notification and post-conviction notice. | Failure to notify is prejudicial; requires remand. | Remand for written sex-offender notification and for proper Article 930.8 notice. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Lampkin, 119 So.3d 158 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2013) (sufficiency review and missing record issues)
- State v. Dixon, 982 So.2d 146 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2008) (victim testimony may sustain offenses without medical evidence)
- State v. McClain, 877 So.2d 1135 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2004) (confrontation-clause preservation of objections to videotapes)
- State v. Roca, 866 So.2d 867 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2004) (credibility and corroboration in multi-victim sexual offenses)
- State v. Cheatteam, 986 So.2d 738 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2008) (record deficiency and appellate review standards)