State v. Howard

Decision Date03 June 1994
Citation638 So.2d 216
Parties94-0023 La
CourtLouisiana Supreme Court

Richard P. Ieyoub, Atty. Gen., New Orleans, John R. Walters, Dist. Atty., Walter E. Dorroh, Jr., Jena, for applicant.

Dan B. Cornett, Jena, for respondent.

[94-0023 La. 1] PER CURIAM:

The defendant was charged by bill of information with aggravated battery in violation of La.R.S. 14:34. After trial by jury, he was found guilty as charged. Jurors thereby rejected his testimony that he had shot his girlfriend accidentally after grabbing the victim by her shoulders in an attempt to remove her from a friend's Chevrolet Blazer. The trial court sentenced the defendant to sixty months at hard labor. On appeal, the Third Circuit reversed the defendant's conviction, entered a judgment of guilty of simple battery, and remanded the case for resentencing. State v. Howard, 624 So.2d 1277 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1993), on rehearing, 630 So.2d 2 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1993). "The force or violence that was intentional, namely the grabbing of the victim by her shoulders," the court of appeal reasoned, "was not the same force or violence inflicted by a dangerous weapon." Id., 624 So.2d at 1279. We granted the state's application for review to consider the correctness of that ruling and now reverse. The evidence at trial appears sufficient to convince any rational factfinder that the defendant had intentionally used force or violence against the victim with a dangerous weapon, [94-0023 La. 2] regardless of whether he intended the much greater degree of harm inflicted upon the victim when the gun discharged.

There was no dispute at trial that the defendant shot Chana Simmons, his girlfriend and the mother of his two children, once through her neck and into her shoulder at point blank range with a .25 caliber pistol held in his right hand. At the time of the shooting, Simmons occupied the rear passenger seat of the two-door Chevrolet Blazer owned by her friend Vandell Smith, and driven by another friend, Adrienne Richardson. A third friend, Donna Jackson, sat beside her. They were on the way back from Jonesboro to Jena, Louisiana, in the early morning hours of March 22, 1992, when the defendant spotted the Blazer from across the roadway, turned his own car around, and began following them. As the two vehicles drove through Jena, the defendant flashed his lights and honked his horn, and twice pulled along the right side of the Blazer on the shoulder of the road, in an attempt to pull Richardson over.

The two vehicles finally came to rest in front of the Canal Service Station in Jena. Smith and the defendant emerged from their vehicles and engaged in a brief confrontation during which the defendant pulled out his pistol and ordered Smith aside. The defendant then leaned into the passenger side of the Blazer through the door left open by Smith, pointed his gun at both Jackson and Richardson, and ordered them not to interfere. With the pistol held in his right hand, the defendant then grabbed the protesting Simmons by her shoulders at the tops of her arms and attempted to pull her out of the rear passenger seat. The victim jerked back forcefully and the gun discharged, sending a bullet into the right side of her neck and into her shoulder. At first, neither the defendant nor Simmons realized she had been shot. When Simmons's injuries became apparent, she accompanied the defendant to his car and he drove her to the hospital.

[94-0023 La. 3] The defendant readily conceded at trial that he had attempted to pull Simmons out of the Blazer after bluntly warning Smith, Jackson and Richardson not to intervene. He claimed, however, that his pistol had discharged accidentally when Simmons resisted him and jerked back in her seat. Simmons, who testified for the defense, told jurors that she did not want to see the defendant prosecuted "because I feel he didn't do it on purpose."

The offense of aggravated...

To continue reading

Request your trial
52 cases
  • State v. Pike
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 8 Mayo 2019
    ...nor the intent to inflict serious injury," as is required to support a conviction for second degree battery, citing State v. Howard , 94-0023 (La. 6/3/94), 638 So.2d 216, 217 ). This assignment of error lacks merit. In his sole pro se assignment of error, defendant argues the trial court er......
  • Bickham v. Vannoy
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Louisiana
    • 16 Septiembre 2022
    ... ...           Procedural ... History ...          Petitioner, ... Larry Bickham, is a state prisoner incarcerated at the ... Louisiana State Penitentiary in Angola, Louisiana. In October ... 2015, he was charged by bill of ... sustain ... a conviction is shown by the very doing of the acts which ... have been declared criminal. State v. Howard, ... 94-0023, p. 3 (La. 6/3/94), 638 So.2d 216, 217 (per curiam) ... Criminal negligence exists when, although neither specific ... ...
  • State v. Speed
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 14 Enero 2009
    ...intent necessary to sustain a conviction is shown by the very doing of the acts which have been declared criminal. State v. Howard, 94-0023 (La.6/3/94), 638 So.2d 216; State v. Holmes, 388 So.2d 722 (La. 2. This notation is a reference to the case of Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct......
  • State v. Edwards
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • 27 Marzo 2007
    ...adverted to the prescribed criminal consequences as reasonably certain to result from his act or failure to act.'" State v. Howard, 94-0023 (La.6/3/94), 638 So.2d 216, 217, quoting La. R.S. 14:10(2). General intent may be proved by evidence that the defendant did the acts which have been de......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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