State v. FreemanState v. Freeman
The Defendant, Jamie J. Freeman, appeals his conviction for aggravated battery. He contеnds that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support a conviction of aggravated battery.
Shantelle Williams stated that, as she turned to face Freeman, she was immediаtely struck above her right eye with the broken bottle. While attempting to defend herself, Williams stated she was struck and then physically restrained by a male cousin of Romekia Freeman, Jamie Freeman, whо held her shirt. Shantelle Williams claims she received several serious cuts while the Defendant, Jamie Freeman, held her and encouraged the actions of Romekia Freeman. Williams stated that she fell to the ground where she was kicked, stomped on and beaten. Williams testified that she eventually lost consciousness. She was subsequently transported by ambulance to the hospital.
On March 27, 2000, the Defendant, Jamie Freeman, was charged by bill of information with one count of aggravated second degree battery, a violation of
SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE
In his only assignment of error, the Defendant asserts that the evidence presented at trial wаs not sufficient to support a guilty verdict of aggravated battery. He argues that the evidence failed to show that he ever struck the victim with a dangerous weapon or made physical contаct with a dangerous weapon. The Defendant asserts that the State failed to prove he was a principal, as testimony differed as to his whereabouts and his role during the fight. Further, the Defendant arguеs there was no evidence presented to show any plan to commit this crime.
When the issue of sufficiency of evidence is raised on appeal, the critical inquiry of the reviewing court is whethеr, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State ex rel. Graffagnino v. King, 436 So.2d 559 (La.1983); State v. Duncan, 420 So.2d 1105 (La.1982); State v. Moody, 393 So.2d 1212 (La.1981). It is the role of the fact finder to weigh the respective credibilities of the witnesses, and therefore, the appellate court should not second guess the credibility determinations of the trier of fact beyond the sufficiency evaluations under the Jackson standard of review. See Graffagnino, 436 So.2d at 563, citing State v. Richardson, 425 So.2d 1228 (La.1983). To obtain a conviction, the elements of the crime must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, we must considеr whether sufficient evidence of each element of aggravated battery was introduced at trial.
On the charge of aggravated battery, the record is rеplete with evidence. The victim, Shantelle Williams, testified that Jamie Freeman, whom she identified in court, held her by her shirt, thereby allowing Romekia Freeman to cut and beat her. Although no weapon was introduced at trial, photographs depicting the cuts and the victim‘s existing wounds were shown. Furthermore, medical testimony of the emergency room physician was introduced and indicated that it took thirty-eight stitches to mend the cuts administered to Williams. Arlene Payne, roommate of the victim, testified that Jamie Freeman held Shantelle from the back and encouraged the brawl. Glenn Poullard stated that the Defеndant prevented others from stopping the fight and yelled profanities encouraging the beating. However, under cross examination, Poullard admitted his testimony stating that the Defendant, Jamie Freeman, usеd words to encourage the attack was not in his original statement. Tamekia Dupre‘s testimony placed Jamie Freeman at the scene, right where the fight was going on. Felicia Hinds’ statement places the Defendant right over Shantelle when she was down on the ground. Hinds further testified Shantelle Williams was unconscious and had a large amount of blood covering her. And lastly, the victim, Shantelle Williams, testified that, аs the Defendant held her during the fight, he encouraged his cousin, Romekia, to “beat that bitch.” These testimonies assist in the satisfaction of the elements of the crime, as they show the Defendant was an accomplice in an aggravated battery.
An aggravated battery conviction requires proof of only general criminal intent or showing that the defendant, in the ordinary course of human experience, must have adverted to the prescribed criminal consequences as reasonably certain to result from his act or failure to act.
The Defendant contends that because the evidence clearly indicated that hе never possessed a dangerous weapon, he should be convicted of a lesser offense. However, “[t]he state may prove a defendant guilty by showing that he served as a principal tо the crime by aiding and abetting another.” State v. Smith, 513 So.2d 438, 444 (La.App. 2 Cir.1987).
Although the Defendant did not testify at trial, counsel for the defense presented three alibi witnesses who gave testimony regarding his whereabouts during thе altercation, as well as his role in the brawl. Sonya Evans testified that Jamie Freeman was behind her during the fight to protect her from injury, as she was pregnant with his child at that time. Evans further testified that she did not see thе Defendant grab the shirt of Shantelle Williams. By contrast, some of the State‘s witnesses and the victim named Sonya Evans, “Tweet,” as a participant in the fight, saying she stomped on the victim while she was on the ground. Wаnsetta Celestine testified that she did not see the Defendant hold the victim. However, she further testified that she saw nothing after the crowd developed. Romekia Freeman testified that the Defendant was at the club, but nowhere around the fight. Romekia Freeman pled guilty to aggravated battery. However, she testified that she did not administer the cuts to Shantelle Williams.
A determination of the weight of evidence presented is a question of fact. The resolution of a matter where conflicting testimony exists requires a determination of credibility of the witnesses and is a matter of weight of the evidence. Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 102 S.Ct. 2211 (1982). Such a determination rests solely with the trier of fact who may accept or reject, in whole or in part, the testimony of any witness. State v. Nolan, 503 So.2d 1186 (La.App. 3 Cir.), writ denied, 507 So.2d 226 (La.1987).
Essentially, the trial became a credibility contest between the two sets of witnesses. As previously noted, the fact finder‘s determinations will not be disturbed unless found to be irrational. The testimony presented at trial indicated that Jamie Freeman never possessed a dangerоus weapon. However, the State provided evidence sufficient to prove that the he acted as a principal in the aggravated battery of Shantelle Williams. Therefore, we find no merit in the contention that the conviction is not supported by sufficient evidence.
CONCLUSION
Finding no error, we affirm the Defendant‘s conviction and sentence.
AFFIRMED.