ON APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA. NO. 11-318, DIVISION " M" . HONORABLE HENRY G. SULLIVAN, JR., JUDGE PRESIDING.
PAUL D. CONNICK, JR., DISTRICT ATTORNEY, Twenty-Fourth Judicial District, Parish of Jefferson; TERRY M. BOUDREAUX, ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY, Gretna, Louisiana, COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE.
MARTIN E. REGAN, JR., ATTORNEY AT LAW, New Orleans, Louisiana, COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT.
FREDERICK J. KROENKE, JR., ATTORNEY AT LAW, Louisiana Appellate Project, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT.
JOSE G. ALFARO, LOUISIANA STATE PENITENTIARY, ANGOLA, LA, DEFENDANT/APPELLANT.
Panel composed of Judges Robert A. Chaisson, Robert M. Murphy, and Stephen J. Windhorst.
[14-759 La.App. 5 Cir. 3] ROBERT M. MURPHY,
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is defendant's second appeal.
Defendant was convicted of aggravated rape of a juvenile in violation of La. R.S. 14:42 (count one) and molestation of a juvenile in violation of La. R.S. 14:81.2 (count two). On count one, the trial court sentenced defendant to life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, and on count two, the trial court imposed a concurrent sentence of ten years imprisonment at hard labor. In defendant's first appeal, this Court affirmed defendant's convictions on counts one and two, affirmed defendant's sentence on count one, vacated defendant's sentence on count two, and remanded the matter with instructions to impose a sentence on count two in accordance with La. R.S. 14:81.2(D)(1) as provided for at the time of the offense.
[14-759 La.App. 5 Cir. 4] On January 23, 2014, pursuant to this Court's remand instructions, the trial court re-sentenced defendant on count two to ten years at hard labor in the custody of the Department of Corrections without the benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. The court further gave defendant credit for time served and ordered the sentence on count two to run concurrently with the sentence for count one. On February 21, 2014, defendant filed a motion for reconsideration of sentence that was denied on March 13, 2014. On July 23, 2014, the trial court granted defendant's motion for appeal. This timely appeal follows.
The underlying facts of the case are not relevant to this, defendant's second appeal. Nevertheless, a ...