State v. Taylor

• Decision Date: 28 April 2021
• Docket Number: 20-KA-215
• Parties: STATE of Louisiana v. Shineda N. TAYLOR
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

347 So.3d 1008

STATE of Louisiana

v.Shineda N. TAYLOR

NO. 20-KA-215

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth Circuit.

April 28, 2021

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE, STATE OF LOUISIANA Honorable Paul D. Connick, Jr., Metairie, Thomas J. Butler, Matthew R. Clauss, Lynn Schiffman, John Carr

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT, SHINEDA N. TAYLOR, Bruce G. Whittaker

Panel composed of Judges Fredericka Homberg Wicker, Robert A. Chaisson, and John J. Molaison, Jr.

WICKER, J.

Defendant, Shineda N. Taylor, appeals her conviction for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, a violation of La. R.S. 14:68.4.¹ She assigns as error the insufficiency of the evidence to convict her. For the reasons that follow, we affirm Defendant's conviction and sentence.

The Jefferson Parish District Attorney filed a bill of information on March 21, 2019, charging Ms. Taylor with unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, in violation of La. R.S. 14:68.4. Defendant was arraigned on March 26, 2019, and pled not guilty.² On January 13, 2020, the District Attorney filed a superseding bill of information charging Defendant with unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, in violation of La. R.S. 14:68.4 (count one) and simple kidnapping, in violation of La. R.S. 14:45 (count two). Defendant was arraigned on the superseding bill of information on January 27, 2020, and pled not guilty. Trial was held before a six-member jury on January 28, 2020.

The testimony at trial revealed the following. Ms. Saundra Katz has owned a small auto dealership, Boomtown Auto Sales ("Boomtown"), for approximately twenty years. Boomtown is located on Airline Drive in Kenner, Louisiana between Fairway Street and Tyler Street.³ Ms. Katz testified that Ms. Paulette Elwood, Boomtown's secretary, and Ms. Barbara Tyler had worked with her for a "very long time." Ms. Tyler's cousin also worked as a salesperson at Boomtown.⁴

As of May, 2018, Ms. Tyler had been working at Boomtown as a salesperson for about seven or eight years. Her job duties included, inter alia , selling vehicles and conducting test drives with potential customers. She testified that, when she conducted test drives, she directed potential customers to follow a particular route. The normal test drive route took the customer/driver "out up Airline, down Williams, and back around up through Roosevelt." Ms. Katz confirmed that Boomtown maintains a designated route for test drives and that, for insurance and safety purposes, the designated route does not involve entering onto the interstate. Ms. Katz testified that she never had an issue with a potential customer demanding to take a vehicle onto the interstate prior to this incident.

On the day in question, May 7, 2018, Ms. Tyler testified that she was taking her lunch break in the back of the dealership when she received an overhead page that there was a customer in need of assistance on the sales floor. Ms. Tyler responded to the request and identified the customer as Defendant. Ms. Tyler testified that Defendant had a positive demeanor when she first encountered her; "nothing out of the order." She testified that Defendant arrived with a purse and a backpack.⁵ Ms. Tyler testified that, after Ms. Elwood made a photocopy of Defendant's license,⁶ she—Ms. Tyler—accompanied Defendant on a test drive of a white, 2006 Lexus.⁷

Ms. Tyler testified that after leaving Boomtown, they got onto Airline, traveled down Williams, and headed in the direction of the interstate. As they neared the interstate, Defendant asked Ms. Tyler if they could drive on the interstate. Ms. Tyler testified that she explained that Defendant could not drive onto the interstate because of insurance reasons. Ms. Tyler testified that after Defendant asked, "what could [she] do," she called her boss, Ms. Katz, who also told Defendant that they could not get on the interstate because the insurance did not "go that far." Ms. Tyler testified that while Defendant was talking to Ms. Katz, Defendant turned away from the interstate, onto Veterans Memorial Boulevard, seemingly headed back towards Boomtown, as instructed by Ms. Katz, who remained on the phone. However, at some point, as they were returning to Boomtown, Defendant made a turn, returning them to Williams Boulevard, and again headed in the direction of the interstate.

According to Ms. Tyler, Defendant turned onto Veterans, headed towards Roosevelt Boulevard, and then suddenly turned off Veterans and headed towards Boomtown. She testified that she did not have the opportunity to jump out of the vehicle because Defendant did not fully stop at stop signs and all of the lights were green.⁸ Ms. Tyler testified that she was scared and asked to exit the vehicle multiple times, but that Defendant refused to slow down or let her exit the vehicle. She recalled Defendant bickering on the phone with Ms. Katz, some kind of escalation concerning involving the police, stating that Defendant "thought that if she went back, that we was [sic] going to have her arrested." Ms. Tyler testified that once Defendant became aware of the potential police involvement, "the situation just became no better. She still wouldn't go return me back." Ms. Tyler testified that, at this point, Defendant again made a U-turn and redirected the vehicle back towards Veterans and the interstate.

Ms. Tyler testified that, directly thereafter, Defendant drove the vehicle onto the interstate. She re-iterated that all the lights on Veterans, leading up to the interstate, were green so she could not have safely exited the vehicle, and that Defendant repeatedly denied her requests to get out of the car. She testified that she could not say exactly how many times she asked to get out of the car, but that she had asked "plenty" and was just scared and "wanted to get out the car." She described incessant telephone bickering among her, Defendant, and the Boomtown employees on the other end of the phone; "it just was going on and on."⁹ She testified that eventually she got the phone back from Defendant, but stayed on the call to keep her coworkers apprised of her location and because she "felt like [her] life was in danger."

Ms. Tyler explained that she was panicked, believing that she would not make it back home. She recalled Defendant entering the interstate at the Veterans on-ramp near Lafreniere Park and "gunned the car." Ms. Tyler testified that Defendant told her that she wanted to drive the car to Gentilly, where Defendant would get out, and then Ms. Tyler could drive the vehicle back to Boomtown. Ms. Tyler testified that she told Defendant that she could not drive the car to Gentilly. She testified that she knew that officers were en route and that she did not want to end up in a high-speed chase. Therefore, as Defendant proceeded to "take off placing the Interstate," Ms. Tyler grabbed the steering wheel, pulled the vehicle to the side of the interstate, took the keys out of the ignition, exited the vehicle, and began running. She explained that Defendant then got out of the vehicle and began "hollering" at a "MAP driver" nearby. Ms. Tyler testified that, at that point, while Defendant was out of the car, she then ran back to the vehicle, got in, and drove back to Boomtown. She testified that this was her first, safe opportunity to get away from Defendant. Upon returning to Boomtown, where an officer was waiting for her, Ms. Tyler spoke to the officer and provided a written statement. Ms. Tyler testified that, for some time after this incident, she refused to conduct test drives because she was scared to get in the car with someone for fear that a similar situation might occur.¹⁰

Ms. Katz testified that on May 7, 2018, she was working with Ms. Elwood and Ms. Tyler at Boomtown. She confirmed that she called 9-1-1 because of an incident involving a "customer" and Ms. Tyler while they were on a test drive. She testified that she became aware there was a problem when she overheard Ms. Elwood on the phone, saying, "you can't do—go on the Interstate." She stated that Ms. Elwood then told her that she needed to take the call. Ms. Katz explained that she was on speaker phone with Defendant and Ms. Tyler. She explicitly told Defendant not to take the vehicle onto the interstate and to stay on the route designated for test drives. She also told Defendant to return to Boomtown if she could not stay on the designated route. Ms. Katz testified that Defendant refused to stay on the designated route and also refused to return to Boomtown. She testified that Defendant, instead, asked her about the amount of miles within the designated route. Ms. Katz told Defendant that she did not know the exact mileage, but reiterated that Defendant must keep to the designated route.

Ms. Katz testified that Defendant was not only upset that she could not take the vehicle onto the interstate, but was also bothered by the fact that Boomtown had taken a copy of her driver's license. Ms. Katz informed Defendant it was standard practice to make a copy of a potential customer's driver's license prior to a test drive, but that she would be happy to return the copy of Defendant's license to Defendant upon the return of the vehicle. Ms. Katz testified that Defendant still did not return to Boomtown at that time.

Ms. Katz testified that she continually pleaded with Defendant to safely return Ms. Tyler to Boomtown, and that "at one point when [Defendant] was saying no, I said, you are kidnapping her. We're going to call the police. Bring her back." She testified that Ms. Tyler's voice sounded terrified and that she asked for Defendant to safely return Ms. Tyler "four, five, six times. I just kept saying bring us back Bea." Ms. Katz testified that Defendant just responded, "Well, you called the police." Ms. Katz explained to Defendant that she had not yet actually called the police, but that she really would if Defendant did not return Ms. Tyler, "and she refused."

Throughout the incident, Ms. Katz testified that she just kept thinking, "This is terrible. ...