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. Garnett

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Third Circuit

January 23, 2019

STATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
JULIUS JAMAL GARNETT

          APPEAL FROM THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF RAPIDES, NO. 321, 112 HONORABLE MARY LAUVE DOGGETT, DISTRICT JUDGE.

          Edward K. Bauman Counsel for Defendant/Appellant: Julius Jamal Garnett

          Jeffrey M. "Jeff" Landry Colin Clark Counsel for Appellee: State of Louisiana

          Phillip Terrell, Jr. Michael Shannon Counsel for Appellee: State of Louisiana

          Julius Jamal Garnett Defendant/Appellant

          Court composed of Phyllis M. Keaty, D. Kent Savoie, and Van H. Kyzar, Judges.

          PHYLLIS M. KEATY JUDGE.

         Defendant, Julius Jamal Garnett, appeals his conviction and sentence for first degree murder. For the following reasons, Defendant's conviction and sentence are affirmed, and appellate counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.

         FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         On May 9, 2014, Pamela Carnahan was found dead in her apartment located in Alexandria, Louisiana. She died from stab wounds, and items found at the scene of the crime contained Defendant's DNA. On September 25, 2014, Defendant was indicted for first degree murder, a violation of La.R.S. 14:30. Following a jury trial, a mistrial was declared on March 17, 2016. Thereafter, another jury was selected, and a second trial commenced. On July 14, 2016, Defendant was found guilty as charged by an eleven to one vote. On July 22, 2016, Defendant's motion for post-verdict judgment of acquittal was denied in open court. Defendant waived sentencing delays, and the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment at hard labor, without the benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence.

         Appellate counsel has filed a motion and supporting brief, seeking to withdraw pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), alleging that there are no non-frivolous issues for this court to review. Additionally, Defendant has filed a pro se brief on appeal, asserting the following two errors.

(1) The evidence presented in this case is insufficient to sustain [Defendant's] conviction.
(2) The jury's verdict was not unanimous as required by Article I, §§ 2, 3, and 17(A) of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974, La. C.Cr.P. art. 782, and the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

         DISCUSSION

         I. 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, we find no errors patent.

         II. Pro Se Assignment of Error Number 1

         In his first pro se assignment of error, Defendant contends that the evidence adduced against him at trial was circumstantial and insufficient to support his conviction. Defendant questions whether the State presented sufficient evidence to prove any underlying felony ...


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.