State v. Breaux
| Decision Date | 04 May 2016 |
| Docket Number | 15-1004 |
| Parties | STATE OF LOUISIANA v. ROSALYN FAITH BREAUX |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, John D. Saunders, and Phyllis M. Keaty, Judges.
AFFIRMED.
Lake Charles, Louisiana 70602-1747
Counsel for Defendant/Appellant:
Rosalyn Faith Breaux
Jennings, Louisiana 70546
Counsel for Appellee:
State of Louisiana
Defendant, Rosalyn Faith Breaux, appeals her conviction and sentence for negligent homicide. For the following reasons, Defendant's conviction and sentence are affirmed.
On June 6, 2014, Defendant was at a house in Welsh, Louisiana, when a gun she was holding discharged, killing Jeremy Ardoin (Jeremy) and wounding Nicholas Coble (Nick). At the time of the shooting, Defendant was living at that house with Jeremy and his brother, Tommy Ardoin (Tommy). On August 26, 2014, Defendant was charged with the second degree murder of Jeremy, in violation of La.R.S. 14:30.1, and pled not guilty.1 Following a January 30, 2015 jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of negligent homicide in violation of La.R.S. 14:32.2 On May 4, 2015, Defendant was sentenced to serve five years at hard labor, which is the maximum sentence for negligent homicide. Although no contemporaneous objection was made during the sentencing, a motion to reconsider was filed on May 5, 2015, alleging Defendant's sentence was excessive. It was denied that same day. Defendant subsequently appealed her conviction and sentence.
On appeal, Defendant asserts the following three assignments of error:
In accordance with La.Code Crim.P. art. 920, all appeals are reviewed for errors patent on the face of the record. After reviewing the record, we find no errors patent.
In her first assignment of error, Defendant contends the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was not acting in self-defense to prevent great bodily harm or death to her by Nick. Self-defense in homicide claims was discussed by this court in State v. Miller, 98-642, p. 4 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/28/98), 720 So.2d 829, 831-32, writ denied, 98-3119 (La. 5/14/99), 741 So.2d 659, as follows:
When a defendant in a homicide prosecution asserts that he acted in self-defense, he does not have any burden of proof on that issue. The State bears the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the homicide was not committed in self-defense. State v. Hall, 91-1296 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/6/92); 606 So.2d 972; State v. Patterson, 295 So.2d 792 (La.1974); State v. Carrier, 95-1003 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/6/96); 670 So.2d 794, writ denied, 96-0881 (La.9/20/96); 679 So.2d 431; State v. Makar, 578 So.2d 564 (La.App. 3 Cir.1991). This court has characterized this burden of proof as a heavy one in which the state must "exclude every reasonable hypothesis of justification by self-defense." Makar, 578 So.2d at 569. When a defendant claims, on appeal, that the state failed to prove a homicide was not committed in self-defense, the standard of review is that of Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d560 (1979), that is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the homicide was not committed in self-defense. Makar, 578 So.2d 564.
In this case, we must determine whether any rational trier of fact could have found that Jeremy's death was not committed by Defendant acting in self-defense. We look to the trial testimony and evidence to see if the State excluded every reasonable hypothesis of justification by self-defense. At trial, the State provided the live testimony of Officer Matt Doucet of the Welsh Police Department. Officer Doucet testified that he was on duty when the shooting occurred and was dispatched to the house in question shortly thereafter. He stated that once he arrived and knocked on the door, Defendant opened it and Officer Doucet indicated that Defendant "was hysterical." The State then introduced as an exhibit a video recording from his police car, which included a dashboard camera, an interior camera, an interior microphone, and a wireless microphone connected to Officer Doucet's belt. The dashboard camera video corroborates Officer Doucet's testimony showing Defendant hysterically crying, screaming, jumping around, and pleading with God. Officer Doucet's testimony is further corroborated by the trial testimony of Chief Marcus Crochet and Officer Chad Romero, who both stated that upon their arrival at the house, they separately spoke to Defendant who advised them she shot Jeremy.
The State also submitted into evidence the video-taped interview between Detective Aaron Istre and Defendant on the day of the shooting. Therein Defendant told Detective Istre she was holding the gun that accidentally discharged and killed Jeremy. Defendant claimed Nick had previously beaten her and that on the day in question, Nick threatened her and grabbed her arm. This is corroboratedby Detective Istre's trial testimony on cross-examination that he noticed marks on her arm during their interview. The video-taped interview further shows Defendant's allegation that Nick tried to remove the gun from her hand after she loaded it, and she told him to leave her alone. Defendant claimed Jeremy was attempting to get Nick off of her when the gun fired although she mistakenly believed the safety was engaged before the shooting. Defendant claimed she was unfamiliar with the gun and unaware that Nick had also been wounded by the shot.
Detective Istre also testified at trial on behalf of the State. He agreed that he was the lead investigator who interviewed Defendant via video tape on the day of the shooting. On cross-examination, Detective Istre testified that the gun was tested for fingerprints although he admitted it was not tested to determine its working condition. Detective Istre stated that Nick's reputation for truthfulness in the community was "[n]ot very well[]" and that he exhibited past violent behavior. On re-direct examination, Detective Istre stated that the marks on Defendant's arms that he noticed during her interview looked like old, faded bruises. He also testified that after handling the gun in question and admitting that he owned a similar type of gun, the subject gun seemed to be functioning normally.
The State also produced the live testimony of Dr. Terry Welke, the Calcasieu Parish coroner, who testified as an expert forensic pathologist. Dr. Welke noted that Jeremy's death certificate, which was admitted into evidence, lists his cause of death as a gunshot wound whereas his manner of death is listed as a homicide. Dr. Welke explained that the homicide designation simply meant that Jeremy was killed by another person. The State also introduced Jeremy's autopsy photographs which Dr. Welke identified. Pursuant to a photograph showing the entrance bullet hole in Jeremy's body, Dr. Welke opined that the gun barrel wasapproximately six inches to two feet away from him when it discharged. Dr. Welke's opinion was based on the compactness of the entry wound and the presence of soot around it, which indicated there was no one in between Jeremy and the barrel of the gun when it was discharged. On cross-examination, Dr. Welke reaffirmed that the classification of Jeremy's manner of death as a homicide does not show intent but merely acknowledges that someone other than Jeremy inflicted the deadly wound. Dr. Welke stated that if another individual was hit with pellets from the same shot that killed Jeremy, that person would have been standing behind him.
Defendant's brother, Joshua Breaux, also testified at trial on behalf of the State. He stated that a few days prior to the shooting, he was outside of his father's house in Jennings, Louisiana, when Nick brought Defendant to the residence. Although Joshua agreed to being "under the influence" when they arrived, he remembered that Nick and Defendant exited the vehicle and were searching through the car while arguing with each other. Their argument ensued, according to Joshua's recollection, because Nick had taken Defendant's money. Joshua stated that Nick thereafter walked around the car when Defendant told Joshua that Nick had previously beaten her. At that point, according to Joshua, he got in between Defendant and Nick. He testified that Nick subsequently got into the car and left.
Nick also testified at trial on behalf of the State. He stated that he had been friends with Tommy and Jeremy for approximately twenty years and that he introduced Defendant to Tommy a few weeks before the shooting. Nick testified that Defendant called him the day before the shooting, advising that she had robbed someone at the house and that she needed him to pick her up in Welsh andbring her to Jennings. Nick stated that when he picked her up, she got into the car with a large duffel bag....
To continue reading
Request your trial