Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Breaux

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Third Circuit

November 2, 2017

STATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
SEAN J. BREAUX

         APPEAL FROM THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF VERMILION, NO. 58337-J HONORABLE LAURIE A. HULIN, DISTRICT JUDGE

          Honorable Keith A. Stutes Lafayette Parish District Attorney COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE: State of Louisiana

          John V. Ghio Assistant District Attorney COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE: State of Louisiana

          Edward Kelly Bauman Louisiana Appellate Project COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT: Sean J. Breaux

          Court composed of Elizabeth A. Pickett, John E. Conery, and Candyce G. Perret, Judges.

          JOHN E. CONERY JUDGE

         AFFIRMED.

         On January 27, 2015, Defendant, Sean J. Breaux, was charged by bill of indictment with one count of aggravated rape, in violation of La.R.S. 14:42.[1] On May 12, 2016, the trial court ordered a sanity commission on Defendant's motion. One member of the commission was replaced on June 2, 2016. On September 1, 2016, after reviewing the sanity commission's report, the trial court found that Defendant was competent to stand trial. The trial court's decision was based on acknowledgment by counsel for the State and Defendant that the report of the two remaining members of the sanity commission determined Defendant was competent to stand trial.

         On November 14, 2016, Defendant entered a plea of no contest to an amended, and lesser, charge of second degree rape pursuant to La.Code Crim.P. art. 14:42.1[2], with the agreement that a Pre-Sentence Investigation (PSI) Report would be ordered. On January 20, 2017, after considering the PSI Report and all evidence, the court sentenced Defendant to thirty-five years at hard labor, with the first ten years to be served without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. The sentencing range for violations of La.Code Crim.P. art. 14:42.1 are imprisonment at hard labor for at least five and no more than forty years, with the added requirement that at least two of the years must be imposed without the benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. La.Code Crim.P. art. 14:42.1.

         On February 3, 2017, Defendant filed a pro se "Motion for Amending or Modifying of Sentence" with the trial court. It failed to set forth grounds or argument in support of modification of his sentence, which is required by La.Code Crim.P. art. 881.1(B). Defendant then filed a second identical motion on February 21, 2017. Both motions were denied by the trial court without reasons, as allowed by La.Code Crim. P. art. 881.1(D).

         Defendant appealed and is now before this court asserting one assignment of error: that his sentence is excessive and "considering the facts of [the] case, was an abuse of the trial court's discretion." For the following reasons, we affirm the trial court's judgment sentencing Defendant to serve thirty-five years at hard labor, with the first ten years being without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence.

         FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         On or about October 24, 2014, Defendant raped the victim, a twelve year old girl. This rape was characterized as "vaginal sexual intercourse without the lawful consent of the victim." At sentencing, and in support of the plea agreement, the State set forth the factual basis that Defendant had violated La.Code Crim.P. art. 14:42.1 by having vaginal sexual intercourse with the twelve year old victim without her lawful consent. The State further asserted the rape also fit the constraints of La.Code Crim.P. art. 14:42.1 because the victim was prevented from resisting the rape by force or threats of physical violence because the victim reasonably believed that attempts at resisting would not prevent the rape.

         ERRORS PATENT

         In accordance with La.Code Crim.P. art. 920, all appeals are reviewed for errors patent on the face of the record. After reviewing the record, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.