State v. Sly

• Docket Number: 23-KA-60
• Decision Date: 02 November 2023
• Citation: State v. Sly, 376 So.3d 1047 (La. App. 2023)
• Parties: STATE of Louisiana v. Lawrence SLY
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana

376 So.3d 1047

23-60 (La.App. 5 Cir. 11/2/23)

STATE of Louisiana

v.Lawrence SLY

NO. 23-KA-60

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit.

November 02, 2023

ON APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA

NO. 19-6813, DIVISION "I"

HONORABLE NANCY A. MILLER, JUDGE PRESIDING

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE, STATE OF LOUISIANA Honorable Paul D. Connick, Jr. Thomas J. Butler Juliet L. Clark

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT, LAWRENCE SLY Carol Anne Kolinchak

Panel composed of Judges Susan M. Chehardy, Marc E. Johnson, and Stephen J. Windhorst

CHEHARDY, C.J.

₁Defendant, Lawrence Sly, appeals his conviction and sentence for second degree murder. On appeal, he argues that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to sustain the jury’s guilty verdict because the evidence supported a finding that Sly was acting in self-defense and, thus, his actions were justifiable. Further, Sly argues that his sentence is excessive. After thorough review and consideration of the record and applicable law, for the reasons that follow, we affirm Sly’s conviction and sentence.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

[1] On June 18, 2020, a Jefferson Parish Grand Jury indicted defendant, Lawrence Sly ("Sly"), with the second degree murder of Garland Webber ("Webber"), in violation of La. R.S. 14:30.1. Sly was arraigned on June 19, 2020, and pleaded not guilty. On June 19, 2020, defense counsel filed omnibus and pretrial motions, including motions for discovery and inspection, for exculpatory evidence for Sly, and to suppress confession, physical evidence, and identification. A motion hearing was held on October 1, 2020, regarding Sly’s motion to suppress statement, which the trial court denied.¹

Thereafter, defense counsel filed a motion for supplemental discovery requesting the State to provide medical and prescription information relating to Webber. The district court originally ordered the State to produce the information, to which the State responded by filing a motion to quash. On February 10, 2021, the district court denied Sly’s motion for supplemental discovery and granted the State’s motion to quash. On July 21, 2021, defense counsel filed a second motion for discovery of Webber’s medical records, which the trial court denied on August ₂17, 2021. Sly filed a writ application seeking review of the district court’s ruling, which this Court denied. Sly v. State, 21-K-648 (La. App. 5 Cir. 11/9/21), 2021 WL 5869521 (unpublished writ disposition). The Louisiana Supreme Court denied writs. Sly v. State, 21-1849 (La. 2/15/22), 332 So.3d 1180.

Trial commenced before a twelve-person jury on June 14, 2022. On July 17, 2022, a unanimous jury found Sly guilty as charged. On July 8, 2022, Sly filed a motion for new trial and for post-verdict judgment of acquittal, which was denied on July 11, 2022. Three impact statements were presented that day. Sly was sentenced on July 14, 2022, to life imprisonment without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. Sly filed a motion for appeal on July 18, 2022, which was granted on July 20, 2022. Sly’s motion to reconsider sentence was filed on July 27, 2022, and denied the same day.² This timely appeal ensued.

ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

On appeal, Sly raises fifteen assignments of error:

1. The evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to prove that a crime had occurred.

2. Mr. Sly’s right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses against him was violated when the state introduced a 911 call containing testimonial statements and incorrectly attributed the call to Damon Payne.

3. Mr. Sly was denied his right to present a defense.

4. The State failed to disclose material, relevant impeachment evidence and allowed false testimony to go uncorrected. (Brady Claim)

5. Jury Instruction errors mandate a new trial.

6. The State impermissibly prejudiced the jury when it used the facts of the case to voir dire jurors.

7. Mr. Sly was represented by conflicted counsel.

8. Mr. Sly was denied his right to trial by a jury of his peers.

₃9. The improper introduction of victim impact evidence mandates a new trial.

10. Mr. Sly was denied his right to a fair trial when the State was permitted to introduce highly prejudicial, inadmissible hearsay testimony.

11. Mr. Sly’s sentence is cruel, unusual, and excessive in violation of Article I, Section 20 of the Louisiana Constitution and the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

12. Mr. Sly’s statement was not knowing, intelligent and voluntary and should have been suppressed.

13. Mr. Sly has been denied his right to a complete appellate record.

14. Mr. Sly was denied his right to a fair trial presided over by an impartial judge.

15. The cumulative impact of these errors mandates a new trial.

FACTS

Sly and the victim, Garland Webber, were next-door neighbors for "years" and shared an alley between their respective homes. While they were initially friends, the relationship deteriorated over time.

The police were summoned to their residences on four separate occasions between October 2015 and May 2018; namely, October 3, 2015, October 30, 2015, October 6, 2017, and May 27, 2018. The first three incidents involved Webber possessing a firearm while on his property outside of his home. The May 27, 2018 incident involved a physical altercation between the two neighbors that Sly claims left him blind in one eye. Ultimately, on November 11, 2019, Sly shot Webber six times resulting in Webber’s demise. According to Sly, he acted in self-defense.

Emergency 9-1-1 Calls

Three 9-1-1 calls made on November 11, 2019, were played for the jury.³ In one call, a male caller relayed that a shooting had occurred in front of his residence and that there were "multiple gunshots and a guy down" on the sidewalk. He ₄stated the person sustained multiple gunshot wounds and was not breathing. The caller, who did not identify himself or anyone else, indicated that saw the shooting, but did not want to say anything, nor did he want to speak to an officer. On the recording, the caller can be heard asking whether anyone knew "any kind of life-saving," and was then interrupted by another male voice stating, "He is dead."⁴ The caller is heard asking that person whether the victim had a gun, and was told "he was running away." The caller reiterated that he saw the entire thing.

On a second call, a female stated that someone shot and killed a man. She claimed that she heard six or seven gunshots, but did not see anything. A third caller, also a female, relayed that the shooter was black and wearing a grey hat and dark clothing. She stated she heard the shooter say that he was going to go to jail.

Damon Payne

Payne was called by the State to testify at trial. While he admitted making a 9-1-1 call on November 11, 2019, regarding a shooting, and initially admitted that it was his voice heard on the 9-1-1 call, as the 9-1-1 tape was played to the jury, he recanted and insisted that it was not. Payne identified the person that was shot and acknowledged that he called Webber’s daughter right after the shooting. He stated he did not recall telling the 9-1-1 operator that he did not want to speak to the officers, and denied that he was an eyewitness to the shooting. Payne conceded that he did not respond to the various attempts made by the district attorney’s office to speak with him about the shooting.

Sergeant Jeffrey Melle

Sergeant Melle, a Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office ("JPSO") employee for thirteen years, was the first officer to arrive on the scene in response to a 9-1-1 call reporting that a person had been shot in the 3800 block of Chinkapin Street in ₅Harvey, Louisiana. Sgt. Melle observed a male lying face down across the sidewalk suffering from multiple gunshot wounds to his back and head. He immediately attempted to render aid, but to no avail. After confirming that the victim showed no signs of life, Sgt. Melle began securing the scene. No firearm was discovered on or near the victim.

Sgt. Melle stated that when he arrived on the scene there were multiple people present, including Sly, who voluntarily approached him and declared that he shot Webber. Sgt. Melle immediately placed Sly in handcuffs, advised him of his Miranda⁵ rights from memory, which Sly indicated he understood. Sgt. Melle informed Sly that he was being detained and placed him in the backseat of his unit. Sly advised Sgt. Melle that the gun he used to shoot Webber was on the hood of a vehicle located across the street from Webber’s body. Sgt. Melle recovered the weapon, which had a live round in the chamber, "rendered it safe," and placed it in a pocket of his cargo pants.⁶

Sgt. Melle testified that once other units arrived on the scene, he elected to transfer Sty to another unit that had a cage. He stated that Sly did not appear to have sustained any injuries nor did he observe any signs of a struggle. Sty was Mirandized a second time, after which he provided a more detailed statement to Sgt. Melle. Sty told him that he and Webber lived next door to one another, had experienced previous altercations involving violence, and that he was scared of Webber. Sty recounted that earlier that evening, he went to the shared alley to take out his garbage, when he saw Webber and words were exchanged. Sty related that Webber told him something, which he perceived as threatening, so he shot Webber. Sgt. Melle testified that, while Sly did state that Webber had previously instigated arguments and threatened him with a rifle, Sly did not tell him that he ₆thought Webber had a weapon or that he had been reaching for a weapon when Sty shot him. Sgt. Melle stated that no other witnesses came forward, and that when homicide detectives responded to the scene, they took over the investigation.

Detective Donald Zanotelli

Detective Zanotelli, while employed by the JPSO in the Homicide Section, was the lead investigator in Webber’s murder. He testified that, upon arriving on the scene in the 3800 block of...