24-KH-636
La. Ct. App.Jan 29, 2025Background
- Steven R. Tate was convicted by a jury of second-degree murder after shooting and killing Ethan Allen in a confrontation that followed text messages arranging a marijuana purchase and concerning Allen’s relationship with a minor.
- Tate asserted the shooting was in self-defense; ballistic and witness evidence was presented at trial on the sequence and nature of the gunfire.
- The State introduced evidence of a prior 2015 attempted armed robbery charge against Tate, which had been dismissed due to lack of cooperation by the victim.
- Tate filed an application for post-conviction relief (APCR) alleging ineffective assistance of counsel on several grounds, including failures in witness examination and handling of prior bad acts evidence.
- The trial court denied post-conviction relief, finding Tate did not meet his evidentiary burden, and Tate sought supervisory review, prompting this appellate writ application.
Issues
| Issue | Tate's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective Cross-examination of Crime Scene Expert | Counsel failed to challenge "focused" vs. "sporadic" gunfire conclusions | Counsel exercised reasonable strategy in limited questioning | Not deficient; within strategic discretion |
| Admission of Prior Bad Acts Evidence | Counsel failed to adequately prevent other crimes evidence | Counsel objected and preserved the issue for appeal | No ineffective assistance; objection preserved issue |
| Failing to Call Exculpatory Witness | Counsel should have called Alizah Dryant to support self-defense claim | Lack of affidavit or specifics; witness not shown to be available or helpful | No deficiency shown; speculative claim |
| Cross-exam of Eyewitness and Impeachment | Counsel failed to impeach Marrero on gunshot sounds and attachments | Counsel challenged Marrero’s expertise; attachments were not convictions | Counsel's performance reasonable; attachments immaterial |
| Failure to Request Mistrial | Counsel did not move for mistrial after prior bad acts evidence | Counsel objected; mistrial would not have been granted | No prejudice; not ineffective |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective assistance standard requires performance deficiency and prejudice)
- State v. Casimer, 113 So.3d 1129 (summarizes Strickland standard for Louisiana)
- State v. Brooks, 661 So.2d 1333 (scope of cross-examination and trial strategy)
- State v. Allen, 955 So.2d 742 (witness selection as trial strategy)
- State v. Williams, 613 So.2d 252 (no ineffective assistance where issue would not have succeeded)