State v. Barnett

Decision Date03 April 2019
Docket NumberNO. 18-KA-254,18-KA-254
Parties STATE of Louisiana v. Shaun BARNETT
CourtCourt of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE, STATE OF LOUISIANA, Paul D. Connick, Jr., Metairie, Terry M. Boudreaux, Gretna, Darren A. Allemand

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT, SHAUN BARNETT, Shaun Barnett, Jane L. Beebe

Panel composed of Judges Fredericka Homberg Wicker, Jude G. Gravois, and Stephen J. Windhorst

GRAVOIS, J.

Defendant, Shaun Barnett, was convicted by a jury of the first degree murder of Dawn Scott, the first degree murder of Raynell Kimbrough, and of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. On appeal, he argues multiple assignments of error. After thorough review, we find no reversible error and affirm defendant's convictions and sentences.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On August 25, 2016, a Jefferson Parish Grand Jury indicted defendant, Shaun Barnett, with the second degree murder of Dawn Scott in violation of La. R.S. 14:30.1 (count one), the second degree murder of Raynell Kimbrough in violation of La. R.S. 14:30.1 (count two), and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of La. R.S. 14:95.1 (count three). Defendant was arraigned on August 26, 2016 and pled not guilty.

On September 7, 2017, a Jefferson Parish Grand Jury returned a superseding indictment amending defendant's charges from the second degree murder of Dawn Scott and the second degree murder of Raynell Kimbrough to the first degree murder of Dawn Scott in violation of La. R.S. 14:30 (count one), the first degree murder of Raynell Kimbrough in violation of La. R.S. 14:30 (count two), and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of La. R.S. 14:95.1 (count three).1 On September 8, 2017, defendant was arraigned and pled not guilty.

On November 6, 2017, the State filed a Notice of Intent to Use Other Acts Evidence Pursuant to La. C.E. art. 404(B). On December 19, 2017, after a hearing, the trial judge granted the State's Notice of Intent to Use Other Acts Evidence Pursuant to La. C.E. art. 404(B) and ruled that the other acts evidence was admissible. Defendant sought writs, which this Court granted. This Court found that the other acts evidence was not admissible. State v. Barnett , 18-K-22 (La. App. 5 Cir. 1/19/18) (unpublished writ disposition). The State filed a writ with the Louisiana Supreme Court; the Supreme Court granted the writ and reinstated the ruling of the district court. State v. Barnett , 18-0121 (La. 1/21/18), 233 So.3d 605.

On January 22, 2018, the defense made an oral motion for competency that the trial judge initially granted, but then denied. Defendant thereafter informed the trial judge that he wanted to represent himself. On that same date, the State amended the indictment in connection with a predicate offense in count three to correct a typographical error regarding the statutory citation and the name of the offense. Also, the trial judge ordered the State to remove two of the predicate convictions from count three.

From January 22–26, 2018, the case was tried before a twelve-person jury that found defendant guilty as charged on all counts. On February 8, 2018, defendant filed a motion for a new trial that was denied on that same date. Afterwards, on that same date, the trial judge sentenced defendant to life imprisonment at hard labor without the benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence on count one; life imprisonment at hard labor without the benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence on count two; and imprisonment at hard labor for ten years without the benefit of probation or suspension of sentence on count three, with all of the sentences to run concurrently with each another. On February 19, 2018, defendant filed a timely motion for an appeal that was granted on February 21, 2018.

FACTS

On April 4, 2016, at 6:45 a.m., Erica Russell heard a knock at the door of her residence at 2140 Idaho Avenue, Apartment B, in Kenner, Louisiana. When she opened the door, D.S.,2 the ten-year-old son of her neighbor, Dawn Scott, told her that his mother did not want to wake up, that he did not know where his father was, and that "blood is everywhere." Ms. Russell testified that she went to Ms. Scott's nearby residence at 2144 Idaho Avenue, Apartment D, and entered the apartment through the back door which was already open. She went upstairs to Ms. Scott's bedroom, after which she saw Ms. Scott lying in bed, a baby lying on the side of Ms. Scott, Raynell Kimbrough, Ms. Scott's boyfriend, lying between the bed and the dresser, and blood. Ms. Russell called 9-1-1 and reported the incident.

Officer Kenneth Boudoin of the Kenner Police Department responded to the call at 2144 Idaho Avenue at "about 6:52, 53" a.m., which was within minutes of the call coming out. He testified that when he arrived, a female told him that she thought Ms. Scott and Mr. Kimbrough were dead. Officer Boudoin entered the residence and went upstairs, after which he found a deceased male and female and an infant who was breathing. Officer Boudoin spoke to Keoka Jack, a neighbor, who told him that she heard "some boom sound" coming from that apartment. She stated that when she went to check to see where the sounds came from, she saw a champagne-colored vehicle pull out of the driveway.

Detective Mike Jackson of the Kenner Police Department spoke to Arnell Kimbrough, Mr. Kimbrough's sister, who told him that the night before the homicides, Mr. Kimbrough and Shaun Barnett, defendant, were together at a daiquiri shop shooting pool.3 Detective Jackson testified that he learned that defendant's address was 329 Pat Drive in Avondale and that a gold or champagne colored 2003 Ford Taurus with license plate ZNU817 was registered to defendant. On his way to 329 Pat Drive, Detective Jackson noticed a daiquiri shop in the neighborhood close to that address.

Sergeant Edward Rohde of the Kenner Police Department responded to the call at 2144 Idaho Avenue, Apartment D, and had a supervisory role over the crime scene. Sergeant Rohde testified that the crime scene was dusted for fingerprints and items were swabbed for DNA analysis. He stated that no weapons were on the scene, no casings were recovered, no prints came back to defendant, and some prints came back to Mr. Kimbrough. A bag of marijuana was found on the dresser and there was money in a drawer.4

Detective Harold Pendergast of the Kenner Police Department was the lead investigator in the homicides. He arrived at the scene at 7:01 a.m. He testified that they interviewed witnesses, collected evidence, retrieved traffic camera information regarding defendant's license plate, obtained defendant's cell phone records,5 and obtained surveillance camera footage from near the crime scene,6 near defendant's residence,7 and at a nearby daiquiri shop.8

Detective Pendergast stated that they ultimately obtained and executed search warrants for defendant's residence and vehicle.9

D.S., age twelve at the time of trial, testified that he lived with his mother, Ms. Scott, and her boyfriend, Mr. Kimbrough. He explained that there were two bedrooms upstairs and that he and his brother slept in one of them and that Ms. Scott and Mr. Kimbrough slept in the other one. He slept with his door open because his mother did not like it when the door was closed, and when he was in bed, he could look out the open door and see the stairs. D.S. stated that Mr. Kimbrough had guns in the apartment.

D.S. testified that on the night of the incident, he went upstairs to his room and went to sleep. He was awakened when he heard his mother and Mr. Kimbrough arguing that Mr. Kimbrough and someone else downstairs were making too much noise. After the argument was finished, D.S. went downstairs for something to drink, and when he did so, he saw someone with dreadlocks going out the back door. Although D.S. had never seen that person before, he heard Mr. Kimbrough call that person "Shaun." He then went to his room and went back to sleep.

D.S. later heard gunshots during the night and woke up. Thinking the gunshots came from outside, he walked over to the window. D.S. stated that he then heard the gunshots again and saw "little flashing lights" in his mother's room. D.S. hurried up and lay down, after which he saw somebody in black clothes come out of his mother's room and run down the stairs. He then went back to sleep. He stated that the person running down the stairs after the shooting was the same person who walked out the back door and the same person who Mr. Kimbrough called "Shaun."

D.S. explained that the next morning, he woke up and realized his mother had not awakened him. He went into her room and saw Mr. Kimbrough's body on the floor and some blood. He did not see his mother. D.S. went downstairs and saw that the back door was wide open. He recalled seeing one of Mr. Kimbrough's guns the night before; however, when he went to bring his young brother to use the restroom, the gun was not there anymore, and the bullets on top of it were gone. D.S. then went out the back door, knocked on the neighbor's door, and told her that his mother and Mr. Kimbrough were lying down upstairs and that he saw blood. D.S. said that the woman went and checked, then came back downstairs, called the police, and told him his parents were dead.10

Frank Macaluso testified that in April of 2016, he was living in Kenner and that he would leave for work at 5:30 a.m. every morning. In doing so, he would drive to Circle K at the corner of Williams and Veterans to get some coffee. He stated that when he traveled down 22nd Street to get to Williams, he would pass by the apartment complex at 2144 Idaho. Mr. Macaluso testified that on April 4, 2016, he left his house at 5:30 a.m. As he slowly approached the apartment complex in his vehicle, he noticed a "black guy" standing between two vehicles wearing a camouflage jacket11 and something white on his head. He stated that he and the "guy" "kind of startled each other" and "made...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • State v. Manuel
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 2 Junio 2021
    ...was harmless is whether the verdict actually rendered in the case was surely unattributable to the error. State v. Barnett , 18-254 (La. App. 5 Cir. 4/3/19), 267 So.3d 209, 225. We find that even if the trial court had erred by admitting the evidence, any such error would have been harmless......
  • State v. Lavigne
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 24 Mayo 2023
    ... ... neither the victim nor defendant was under the influence of ... drugs at the time of the homicide ... [ 5 ] Because this witness was a minor, her ... initials will be used to protect her identity. See State ... v. Barnett , 18-254 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/3/19), 267 So.3d ... 209, 214 n.2 ... [ 6 ] As is discussed below, at the start of ... trial, the trial court suggested that defense counsel review ... the CAC video and inform the court of anything prejudicial ... before the tape was ... ...
  • State v. Bell
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 22 Junio 2022
    ...court should not reverse the trial court ruling absent an abuse of its discretion." State v. Barnett, 18-254 (La. App. 5 Cir. 4/3/19), 267 So.3d 209, 233. Upon review, we do not find defendant made a clear and unequivocal request to represent himself. Defendant's alleged request occurred on......
  • State v. Veillon
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 29 Julio 2020
    ...1 Due to her status as a minor, O.V. will be referred to be her initials to protect her identity. See State v. Barnett , 18-254 (La. App. 5 Cir. 4/3/19), 267 So.3d 209, 235 n.2.2 Detective Barrett was not able to get a statement from Nicole Veillon until May 3, 2018.3 Ms. Boyd was introduce......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Impeachment
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Trial Evidence Foundations Witnesses
    • 5 Mayo 2019
    ...effect, confuses the issues, misleads the jury, wastes time or is needlessly cumulative. State v. Barnett , 2019 La. App. LEXIS 556 *; 267 So. 3d 209; 2018-254 (La.App. 5th Cir. 2019); 2019 WL 1461887 (La.App. 2019). In order for evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts to be admitted, cer......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT