81 So. 3d 156
La. Ct. App.2011Background
- Quality Machine Works and Quality Machine Manufacturing stored and protected computerized AutoCAD drawings as company property.
- Dean Williamson worked at the Louques' companies for 13 years, later leaving to start his own business.
- After Williamson left, the companies' business declined; a 2003 log showed extensive access to drawings, raising fraud concerns.
- Investigators connected Williamson to copying or obtaining drawings onto CD ROMs before starting his own venture.
- Trial evidence included CDs labeled with client names, hand-written disks, and forensic link-file evidence linking access to AutoCAD drawings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was sufficient proof of taking or use | State | Williamson | Sufficient evidence of use or taking under 14:68 |
| Whether computer data constitutes a movable | State | Williamson | AutoCAD files on CD ROMs are movables |
| Whether jury instructions correctly stated law | State | Williamson | No reversible error; instruction aligned with statute and precedent |
| Whether sentencing complied with Article 894.1 and was excessive | State | Williamson | Sentence not excessive; reasons adequately stated; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hampton, 750 So.2d 867 (La. 1999) (sufficiency standard and post-verdict review guidance)
- State v. Bazley, 60 So.3d 7 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2011) (sufficiency of evidence and appellate review)
- State v. Harrell, 811 So.2d 1015 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2002) (sufficiency and circumstantial evidence considerations)
- State v. Anderson, 979 So.2d 566 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2008) (intent may be inferred from circumstances)
- South Central Bell Tel. Co. v. Barthelemy, 643 So.2d 1240 (La. 1994) (tangible property concept for software; corporeal movables)