Watching and learning from my teammates has definitely made me a better player.
Toggle navigation Menu. Tonight Cloudy skies early, then partly cloudy after midnight. Low 29F. Winds N at 10 to 20 mph. By David Walsh. In Print. Check out our Guide to WillCo. Upcoming Events. Nov Franklin Veterans Day Parade. Tue, Nov 12, Trending Stories.
The purpose of the discovery rules of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to eliminate the unwarranted prejudice which could arise from surprise testimony. Toomer , So. However, the failure of the state to comply with discovery does not warrant automatic reversal; rather, the defendant must show that the failure was prejudicial, and as such, constitutes reversible error.
Ray , So.
In the case sub judice , even assuming that the notice was "late," the defendant has failed to demonstrate how he was prejudiced thereby. Guidry had approximately a week and a half before the Prieur hearing and two weeks before trial to prepare his response to the State's motion, and he has made no allegation that he was unable to produce evidence or witnesses as a result of the untimely notice. Moreover, after deciding to go forward with the Prieur hearing, the trial judge told defense counsel that "if, at the conclusion, you feel prejudiced some kind of way, Mr.
Wooderson, I'll entertain whatever motion you want to make. Accordingly, we find no reversible error in the State's failure to give earlier notice of its intention to call Sheila Anderson as a witness and to introduce at trial evidence of the June 5, arrest. When the issue of sufficiency of the evidence is raised on appeal, the critical inquiry of the reviewing court is whether, 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 , U.
Guédry & Petitpas Family
It is the role of the fact finder to weigh the respective credibility of the witnesses, and therefore the appellate court should not second-guess the credibility determination of the trier of fact beyond the sufficiency evaluations under the Jackson standard of review.
See State ex rel. Graffagnino v. King , So. Richardson , So. Butler , So. The defendant suggests in brief that he did not know that Agent Welsh was a police officer. We find this contention unbelievable. At trial, David Jefferson testified at length as to the events surrounding the beating of Agent Welsh:. So what happened once y'all got back to the corner and y'all talked about the fact that there were some narcs and Harrison had brought a narc with him? A: We was walking down there. And I said — we sat, talking, and I said, "He must be wired or something, you know. Q: When — when you say "he", who are you talking about?
A: Troy. To see if he had a wire, you know.
- where to obtain birth certificate in memphis tn.
- A Girl Called Penny by Jacqueline Guidry — Carve Magazine | HONEST FICTION.
- can t locate mail header pm.
- 3 digit first number phone search.
- Website Feedback.
- OUR BLOGGER JOE GUIDRY RECEIVES CONSERVATION AWARD.
I told him, "Yeah, I'm gonna' check him. Q: Okay. Now, let's back up. So there's no doubt in your mind that you and Troy knew that the person that was in the car, Mr. Welsh — you later learned his name — was a narcotics agent, a police officer? A: Yes, sir. Q: Just so the jury will know, y'all were down on the corner all this time all this was going on, talking about the police being in the area?
In a statement given to police after he was arrested, Guidry himself admitted that he knew Agent Welsh was an undercover officer:. And then, after all the narcotics, them two pulled up first, and then after that we took off. We find that the State met its burden of proving that Guidry knew that the victim was a police officer. Defendant also points out that "threatening to kill someone in an altercation is not specific intent to prove that you intended to carry out that threat. Did you see what — where Troy was as you were striking Mr.
A: He was on this side of me. When I was on top of him, he was stomping him in the head. Witness indicates.
- Louis Guidry?
- STATE v. GUIDRY;
- Message Boards?
- Find Missing Mickey James Guidry!;
Q: Well, where were you when Mr. Guidry was stomping him on the head? Q: And what part of Mr. Guidry's foot was he using to stomp on Mr. Guidry — Mr. Welsh's head? Q: And how high — if you could, demonstrate to the jury how he was — how he was striking him. A: He was stomping him on his head like that. Q: And during that time, was Mr. Guidry saying anything or directing you to do anything to Mr. Q: Was there a point in time when Mr. Welsh was basically out of it, just laying there, not — not conscious?
And what did Mr. Guidry do after — as Agent Welsh laid on the ground? After the incident, Agent Welsh was taken to the hospital and underwent surgery to repair his broken jaw. Agent Welsh testified at trial that he continues to have problems with memory loss and seizures, which his physicians attribute to the severe beating he received. In addition to Jefferson's compelling testimony, the State introduced at trial pictures of the defendant, taken after his arrest, and of Agent Welsh, taken while he was in the hospital. Agent Welsh was a relatively small man. He was described by another officer as approximately 5'4" tall, and weighing about pounds.
On the other hand, Guidry is obviously much larger and stronger, approximately 6'0" tall, and weighs considerably more than Agent Welsh.
Stay up to date with the latest on the law!
We have no difficulty believing that Guidry fully intended to kill Agent Welsh had he not been stopped by the timely arrival of the police. Viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, it is clear that the jury could have reasonably found that Guidry had specific intent to kill a police officer in the line of duty and that he acted toward accomplishing this purpose. Count II: Possession of Cocaine. An additional penalty is provided in Subsection F if the amount of cocaine possessed is more than 28 grams, but less than grams.
Possession of illegal drugs can be in the form of actual possession, if the contraband is found on the defendant's person, or constructive possession, if the circumstances show that the contraband is subject to the defendant's dominion and control. Trahan , So.
Williams , So. Whether a defendant has dominion and control over illegal drugs involves an analysis of the. Tasker , So. Cain , F. The determination of whether there is possession sufficient to convict depends upon the facts peculiar to each case.
Trahan , supra citing State v. Cann , So. David Jefferson testified at trial that on many occasions, he went with Guidry to Veronica Gardner's apartment to retrieve cocaine. If Veronica was not at home, Guidry went to the apartment of another sister who lived in the same apartment complex and picked up a key. Jefferson stated that Guidry would go to the back of Veronica's apartment and come out with crack cocaine, which they would either sell or use themselves.
On the morning of June 11, , Guidry and Jefferson went to Veronica's apartment. As he had done many times before, Guidry went into a back room and came out with cocaine, and the two men left. Guidry cut one ounce of the crack cocaine into pieces with a razor blade and put the pieces into a medicine bottle. When Veronica Gardner's apartment was searched later that evening, a medicine bottle containing crack cocaine was recovered from the bedroom; the defendant's fingerprint was found on the bottle.
Under the Jackson standard of review, we find that the evidence presented was sufficient to prove Guidry's constructive possession of the cocaine found in his sister's apartment. The defendant next contends that the trial court erred in sentencing him, a first-time felony offender, to consecutive sentences of fifteen years for attempted first-degree murder and twenty years for possession of more than 28 grams of cocaine.
We disagree. Regarding the order of the trial judge that the sentences be served consecutively, Article of the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure provides in pertinent part:. Other sentences of imprisonment shall be served consecutively unless the court expressly directs that some or all of them be served concurrently. At sentencing, the trial judge made the following comments:.