State v. Tubbs
| Decision Date | 20 November 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. 52,417-KA,52,417-KA |
| Citation | 285 So.3d 536 |
| Parties | STATE of Louisiana, Appellee v. Anthony Scott TUBBS, Appellant |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
FLOWERS, LONG & HATCH, LLP, By: Christopher Hatch, Counsel for Appellant
J. SCHUYLER MARVIN, District Attorney, JOHN MICHAEL LAWRENCE, Assistant District Attorney, Counsel for Appellee
Before PITMAN, GARRETT, and STEPHENS, JJ.
The defendant, Anthony Scott Tubbs, was convicted of insurance fraud. He was ordered to serve five years at hard labor, with all but one year suspended. He was placed on four years' active, supervised probation and ordered to pay a fine of $1,500, along with restitution. He appeals his conviction and sentence. For the following reasons, we affirm.
Tubbs operated ASAP Appliances ("ASAP") in Bossier City, Louisiana. The business sold and repaired used appliances. Richard Hayden was an employee. On Saturday, May 12, 2012, the vehicles driven by Hayden and Tubbs were parked in a lot behind the business. As Hayden was leaving, he backed his Ford Expedition into a Dodge Ram 3500 truck which was being used that day by Tubbs.1 Tubbs told the police officers who responded to the accident that he was getting into his vehicle when the accident occurred. Hayden later delivered a typed and signed statement to the police taking full responsibility for the accident and stating that Tubbs was entering his vehicle when the accident occurred.
At the scene, Tubbs said he was not injured, but asked for paramedics to check him out because he had recently had a medical procedure. Tubbs later claimed that he was seriously injured in the accident and filed a civil lawsuit against Hayden, State Farm and USAA. State Farm later settled the claim with Tubbs for $8,500. Tubbs also claimed to have been involved in separate, unrelated accidents with other drivers on May 28, 2012, and June 29, 2012, and received settlements from State Farm in those cases as well. According to hospital records, the accident on May 28, 2012, occurred when Tubbs was traveling in his truck at a low rate of speed and was impacted on the passenger side by another vehicle. The accident on June 29, 2012, occurred when Tubbs claimed he was rear-ended in traffic by another vehicle. Tubbs settled the second and third accidents with State Farm for $10,494.18 and $10,592.04, respectively.
Tubbs's insurance claims were eventually investigated by the insurance fraud and auto theft unit of the Louisiana State Police. Hayden changed his version of the events concerning the May 12 accident and said that Tubbs was actually inside the business at the time the collision occurred. In early 2015, Tubbs was charged with one count of insurance fraud in connection with this accident. He was tried by a six-person jury. On March 21, 2017, Tubbs was found guilty as charged. He filed motions for new trial and for post verdict judgment of acquittal, which were denied by the trial court on October 17, 2017.
On November 21, 2017, Tubbs was sentenced to serve five years at hard labor, with all but one year suspended. He was given credit for time served. He was placed on four years' active, supervised probation and ordered to pay a fine of $1,500, along with restitution to State Farm in the amount of $8,500. Tubbs stated his intent to appeal.
After some procedural maneuvering, Tubbs filed a second motion for new trial and sought an evidentiary hearing to supplement the record. The trial court denied the second motion for new trial as untimely. Tubbs now appeals, claiming there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction, the trial court erred when it denied his first motion for new trial, and the sentence imposed was excessive.2
Tubbs argues that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to support his conviction for insurance fraud. This argument is without merit.
The standard of appellate review for a sufficiency of the evidence claim is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307, 99 S. Ct. 2781, 61 L. Ed. 2d 560 (1979) ; State v. Tate , 2001-1658 (La. 5/20/03), 851 So. 2d 921, cert. denied , 541 U.S. 905, 124 S. Ct. 1604, 158 L. Ed. 2d 248 (2004) ; State v. Hughes , 2018-0006 (La. 6/26/19), 284 So. 3d 619, 2019 WL 2750945 ; State v. Turner , 52,510 (La. App. 2 Cir. 4/10/19), 267 So. 3d 1202, writ denied , 2019-00873 (La. 9/24/19), 279 So.3d 386. This standard, now legislatively embodied in La. C. Cr. P. art. 821, does not provide the appellate court with a vehicle to substitute its own appreciation of the evidence for that of the factfinder. State v. Pigford , 2005-0477 (La. 2/22/06), 922 So. 2d 517 ; State v. Dotie , 43,819 (La. App. 2 Cir. 1/14/09), 1 So. 3d 833, writ denied , 2009-0310 (La. 11/6/09), 21 So. 3d 297 ; State v. Turner , supra.
The Jackson standard is applicable in cases involving both direct and circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence provides proof of the existence of a fact, for example, a witness's testimony that he saw or heard something. State v. Turner , supra ; State v. Wooten , 51,738 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2/13/18), 244 So. 3d 1216. An appellate court reviewing the sufficiency of evidence in such cases must resolve any conflict in the direct evidence by viewing that evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution. When the direct evidence is thus viewed, the facts established by the direct evidence and inferred from the circumstances established by that evidence must be sufficient for a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty of every essential element of the crime. State v. Sutton , 436 So. 2d 471 (La. 1983) ; State v. Turner , supra.
Circumstantial evidence is defined as evidence of facts or circumstances from which one might infer or conclude the existence of other connected facts. Circumstantial evidence consists of proof of collateral facts and circumstances from which the existence of the main fact may be inferred according to reason and common experience. State v. Turner , supra ; State v. Walker , 51,217 (La. App. 2 Cir. 5/17/17), 221 So. 3d 951, writ denied , 2017-1101 (La. 6/1/18), 243 So. 3d 1064.
Where there is conflicting testimony about factual matters, the resolution of which depends upon a determination of the credibility of the witnesses, the matter is one of the weight of the evidence, not its sufficiency. State v. Turner , supra. The appellate court does not assess the credibility of witnesses or reweigh evidence. State v. Smith , 94-3116 (La. 10/16/95), 661 So. 2d 442 ; State v. Turner , supra. A reviewing court accords great deference to the factfinder's decision to accept or reject the testimony of a witness in whole or in part. In the absence of internal contradiction or irreconcilable conflict with physical evidence, one witness's testimony, if believed by the trier of fact, is sufficient support for a requisite factual conclusion. State v. Turner , supra ; State v. Payne , 52,310 (La. App. 2 Cir. 1/16/19), 262 So. 3d 498.
Regarding automobile insurance policies, La. R.S. 22:1925 states, in part:
Regarding insurance policies in general, La. R.S. 22:1924 (A)(2)(c) provides, in relevant part:
At trial, the jury heard live testimony from six witnesses. Numerous exhibits were introduced, which included the dash camera video depicting the scene after the police responded; a demand letter sent on June 4, 2012, on Tubbs's behalf to State Farm; the typed statement signed by Hayden; the police department private property accident report; the petition for damages that Tubbs filed against USAA, Hayden, and State Farm; the receipt and release form regarding the settlement with State Farm; and medical records.
The first witness was Senior Trooper Lawrence Hartsfield of the Louisiana State Police. Trooper Hartsfield is an investigator with the insurance fraud and automobile theft unit. He began investigating this matter in April 2013. He examined the police report, the police dash camera video, and the statement signed by Hayden....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Myrick
...may have been more appropriate, but whether the trial court abused its discretion. State v. Williams , supra ; State v. Tubbs , 52,417 (La. App. 2 Cir. 11/20/19), 285 So. 3d 536, writ denied , 20-00307 (La. 7/31/20), 300 So. 3d 404, on recons., 20-00307 (La. 9/8/20), 301 So. 3d 30, and writ......
-
State v. Wilson
...may have been more appropriate, but whether the trial court abused its discretion. State v. Bell , supra ; State v. Tubbs , 52,417 (La. App. 2 Cir. 11/20/19), 285 So. 3d 536, writ denied , 20-00307 (La. 7/31/20), 300 So. 3d 404. The sentence for molestation of juveniles under the age of 13 ......
-
State v. Fisk
...whether another sentence may have been more appropriate, but whether the trial court abused its discretion. State v. Tubbs , 52,417 (La. App. 2 Cir. 11/20/19), 285 So. 3d 536, writs denied , 20-00307 (La. 7/31/20), 300 So. 3d 404), 301 So. 3d 30 ; State v. Kelly , 52,731 (La. App. 2 Cir. 6/......
- State v. Adams