State v. Magee

Decision Date30 November 2012
Docket NumberNo. 2011–KA–0574.,2011–KA–0574.
Citation103 So.3d 285
PartiesSTATE of Louisiana v. James C. MAGEE.
CourtLouisiana Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Capital Appeals Project, Sara Lynn Ottinger, Michael Admirand, Caroline Wallace Tillman, G. Benjamin Cohen, for Appellant.

James D. Caldwell, Attorney General, Walter P. Reed, District Attorney, Kathryn W. Landry, Special Assistant District Attorney, for Appellee.

WEIMER, Justice.

[2011-0574 (La. 1]Defendant James C. Magee was indicted by a grand jury for the first degree murder of Adrienne Magee, the first degree murder of Ashton Zachary Magee (“Zack”), the attempted first degree murder of S.M., and the attempted first degree murder of L.M.1 The defendant was tried before a St. Tammany Parish jury. Following the close of evidence, the jury found the defendant guilty as charged on all counts and, at the conclusion of the penalty phase of the trial, recommended two sentences of death. In accordance with that recommendation, the district court sentenced the defendant to death by lethal injection for the murders of Adrienne and Zack Magee and to two consecutive terms of 50 years of imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence for the attempted first degree murders of S.M. and L.M.

[2011-0574 (La. 2]This is a direct appeal under La. Const. art. V, § 5(D) by James C. Magee, who appeals his convictions and sentences, raising 17 assignments of error.2 After a thorough review of the law and the evidence, no merit is found in any of the assignments of error urged by the defendant. Therefore, the defendant's convictions and sentences are affirmed.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On April 18, 2007, James C. Magee shot and killed his wife Adrienne and their five-year-old son, Zack. He also injured his two daughters, nine-year-old S.M. and eight-year-old L.M.

At the time of the shootings, James and Adrienne, who wed in 1998, had been married for approximately eight years. James was employed as a welder and Adrienne worked at a daycare center owned by her cousin, Tracy Delatte. The couple had three children: S.M., L.M., and Zack.

While the Magees' relationship had been a troubled one, in the fall of 2006, James began experiencing pain in his feet, for which he was prescribed painkillers. The painkillers, coupled with excessive alcohol use, tested the limits of Adrienne's forbearance. In late 2006, the couple separated and Adrienne and the children moved in with Tracy, who lived in the Tall Timbers subdivision in Mandeville, Louisiana, located near the daycare center where both women worked. Afterwards, the children saw their father regularly, primarily on the weekends.

Consistent with this visitation plan, on Sunday, April 15, 2007, James took the children to the Ponchatoula Strawberry Festival. That evening, as prearranged, Adrienne went to the Abita Springs ballpark to pick up the children. When Adrienne [2011-0574 (La. 3]returned to Tracy's home from her rendezvous with James, she was visibly upset. The children were likewise behaving strangely. That evening, James began telephoning Adrienne continuously, leaving a stream of threatening and otherwise “unpleasant” messages in her voice mailbox. Because James kept filling her mailbox with these at-times-angry, at-times-pleading messages, Adrienne purchased a small tape recorder. She recorded the messages each time she emptied her voice mailbox, only to have it fill up again. Fearing for her safety, Adrienne and Tracy moved Adrienne's vehicle to the parking lot of a nearby hospital. The calls from James persisted. At one point during the evening, James telephoned a co-worker, Murray Latapie, from a bar, informing him that he wanted to “kill them all.” 3

The next morning, when the calls from James resumed, Adrienne and Tracy drove to the police station in Covington, Louisiana, where Adrienne filled out a police report. At the suggestion of a deputy, the women proceeded to the courthouse to apply for a restraining order against James. After completing the necessary paperwork, they were informed the order would not be signed until the next day. Having observed James drive by the daycare center several times that day, the women arranged for a police detail at the daycare center.

The following morning, Tuesday, April 17, 2007, the calls from James continued. Tracy and Adrienne went to work at the daycare center, where they received a call informing them the restraining order had been signed. They traveled to the courthouse to pick up a copy of the order and, in an effort to facilitate the process, delivered a copy to an officer for service on James. They also delivered a copy of the order to the children's school before returning to the daycare center where [2011-0574 (La. 4]the police detail had commenced. From a deployed officer, Tracy and Adrienne learned that the restraining order had been served on James. The calls from James ceased.

Meanwhile, James went to the home of a neighbor, Henry Poirier, Jr., and asked for permission to use his computer so that he might try to locate the physical address for a phone number he had obtained. Poirier warned James “not to do anything stupid,” but James giggled, telling Poirier not to worry, he “would read about it in the paper.”

Despite concerns voiced by Tracy, Adrienne retrieved her car from the hospital parking lot Tuesday evening. On Wednesday morning, April 18, 2007, Adrienne resumed her normal routine. Because no further telephone calls had been received from James, the police detail was discontinued. The situation remained quiet until approximately 3:30 p.m., when Tracy received a telephone call from James. Although Tracy did not answer the call, she immediately reported it to Adrienne. Shortly thereafter, Tracy overheard Adrienne speaking on the telephone with James, informing him he would not be able to see the children that weekend due to the restraining order, but assuring him that after the court hearing scheduled for the following Wednesday, visitation would resume, only this time according to a written schedule. After speaking with James, Adrienne reported to Tracy that James was “in sorry mode.” Unbeknownst to Adrienne, however, at approximately 2:00 p.m. that day, James had purchased one hundred rounds of 12–gauge shotgun shells from a local store.

S.M., L.M., and Zack arrived at the daycare center by school bus at their regular time that afternoon. Zack had baseball practice that evening, so at approximately 4:40 p.m., Adrienne loaded the children into her car and left for [2011-0574 (La. 5]Tracy's house so Zack could change clothes for practice. At approximately the same time, Tyler Mendoza, who lived in Tracy's subdivision, was riding his bicycle to a friend's house when he suddenly heard the sound of screeching tires and a revving engine behind him. Turning, he observed a white truck ram into the rear of a small car, sending the car into a nearby ditch. The car struck a fence, crossed over a driveway, and hit a tree. Amid the sounds of a woman's screams, Tyler observed the white truck come to a stop and a man, who he later identified as defendant, exit the truck with a shotgun in his hand. When he observed the man pump the shotgun, Tyler fled the scene in fear, hearing three or four gunshots as he pedaled away.

Delbert Bryars, who lived in the neighborhood, also heard the screeching of tires and the clashing of metal. Exiting his kitchen to his driveway, he discovered a car lodged against a tree. Like Tyler, Bryars observed a man exit a white truck and head toward the car. He heard a woman scream, “No, no, no,” and saw the butt of a gun. A shot was fired and the screaming stopped. Bryars shouted to his wife to call the police. Another shot was fired. Bryars headed toward the truck, but stopped short at the sound of two additional shots being fired. The man then returned to his truck and drove away.

As Bryars made his way toward the car, he observed Zack lying in the street and his mother lying face-up in the ditch. He noticed movement in the car and realized there were two young girls climbing over the seats. He reached S.M., who was holding a bleeding shoulder, first and instructed a neighbor, Donna Sisung, who had arrived on the scene after hearing the gunshots, to take her to his house. L.M. assured Bryars she was not hurt and followed her sister. As Bryars walked with L.M. to his house, they passed Adrienne and Zack. L.M. identified the individuals as her mother and brother and told Bryars that her father “did this. He hates us.”

[2011-0574 (La. 6]Kathy Teegarden, a co-worker of Adrienne's, was leaving work shortly before 5:00 p.m. when she witnessed James' truck pull into the daycare center parking lot. She was forced to slam on her brakes to avoid colliding with the speeding truck. Recognizing the truck and aware of the problems that Adrienne was having with James, she attempted to alert another co-worker who might warn Adrienne of his presence. Unfortunately, she was too late.

The first officer to arrive at the scene was Devin Palys. Officer Palys responded to the “hot call” of a crime in progress and arrived at the scene within minutes. He observed the crashed car and the bodies near it. He discovered that the female victim was deceased, but the child was still breathing. Officer Palys called for multiple emergency medical units and allowed a nurse, Michelle Talazac, who lived in the neighborhood and came to the scene, to assist Zack while awaiting the arrival of additional responders. Zack died during the resuscitation efforts. Officer Palys then proceeded to the Bryars residence where he spoke with both girls. L.M. identified the defendant as the perpetrator and provided his address.

Police officers at the scene were able to reach the defendant on his cell phone. In an extended conversation the officers recorded,James indicated that he had changed vehicles (an assertion which later proved to be false)...

To continue reading

Request your trial
162 cases
  • State v. Addison
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • November 6, 2013
    ... ... We acknowledge that in some jurisdictions, when a defendant exhausts his peremptory challenges after having used a peremptory challenge curatively, reversal of his conviction and sentence is required. See , e.g., State v. Magee, 103 So.3d 285, 307 (La.2012), cert. denied , U.S. , 134 S.Ct. 56, L.Ed.2d (2013). In those jurisdictions, peremptory challenges are deemed substantial rights such that when a defendant uses a peremptory challenge curatively, it "so taints the equity of the proceeding that no jury selected ... ...
  • State v. Addison
    • United States
    • New Hampshire Supreme Court
    • November 6, 2013
    ... ... We acknowledge that in some jurisdictions, when a defendant exhausts his peremptory challenges after having used a peremptory challenge curatively, reversal of his conviction and sentence is required. See , e.g. , State v. Magee , 103 So. 3d 285, 307 (La. 2012), cert ... denied , Magee v. Louisiana , 82 U.S.L.W. 3180 (U.S. Oct. 7, 2013) (No. 12-9070). In those jurisdictions, peremptory challenges are deemed substantial rights such that when a defendant uses a peremptory challenge curatively, it "so taints the equity of ... ...
  • State v. Wells
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • April 13, 2016
    ... ... Wells' right to counsel. For evidence to be admitted at trial, it must be identified and authenticated. See State v. Norah, 121194, p. 31 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/11/13), 131 So.3d 172, 192 (citing State v. Magee, 110574, pp. 4142 (La.9/28/12), 103 So.3d 285, 31516 ). Evidence is authenticated by a showing sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims. See La. C.E. art. 901 A. The evidence may be authenticated in a variety of ways, including testimony of a ... ...
  • State v. Anthony
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • December 30, 2020
    ... ... Lyons , 13-564 (La. App. 5 Cir. 1/31/14), 134 So.3d 36, 40. Furthermore, objecting counsel may and should proffer the excluded evidence or a summary thereof so that the appellate court can better assess admissibility of evidence of excluded evidence. La. C.E. art. 103 ; State v. Magee , 11-574 (La. 9/28/12), 103 So.3d 285, 326 certiorari denied , 571 U.S. 830, 134 S.Ct. 56, 187 L.Ed.2d 49 ; State v. Snyder , 12-896 (La. App. 5 Cir. 10/9/13), 128 So.3d 370, 382-383 ; 309 So.3d 928 State v. Massey , 11-358 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/27/12), 97 So.3d 13, 28, writ denied , 12-993 ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 books & journal articles
  • Photographs, slides, films and videos
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Is It Admissible? Part IV. Demonstrative Evidence
    • May 1, 2022
    ...court abused its discretion in finding that the probative value of each photograph outweighed its prejudicial effect. State v. Magee , 103 So.3d 285 (La., 2012). In a trial prosecuting defendant for first degree murder and attempted first degree murder, photographic evidence would be admitt......
  • Photographs, Slides, Films and Videos
    • United States
    • August 2, 2016
    ...and related to the defendant’s prior calculation and design as well as the nature and circumstances of the murders). State v. Magee , 103 So.3d 285 (La., 2012). In a trial prosecuting defendant for first degree murder and attempted first degree murder, photographic evidence would be admitte......
  • Photographs, slides, films and videos
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Is It Admissible? - 2018 Demonstrative evidence
    • August 2, 2018
    ...and related to the defendant’s prior calculation and design as well as the nature and circumstances of the murders). State v. Magee , 103 So.3d 285 (La., 2012). In a trial prosecuting defendant for irst degree murder and attempted irst degree murder, photographic evidence would be admitted ......
  • Photographs, slides, films and videos
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Is It Admissible? - 2019 Demonstrative evidence
    • August 2, 2019
    ...and related to the defendant’s prior calculation and design as well as the nature and circumstances of the murders). State v. Magee , 103 So.3d 285 (La., 2012). In a trial prosecuting defendant for irst degree murder and attempted irst degree murder, photographic evidence would be admitted ......
  • 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