State v. Cutwright
626 So. 2d 780, 1993 WL 431305 (1993)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Once the corpus delicti of a crime, such as a death by violent means, is established by evidence independent of the defendant's confession, the confession alone can be sufficient to prove the essential elements of the crime, including the underlying felony required for a felony-murder conviction.
Facts:
- Leroy Cutwright, III, and Marshall Walker smoked crack cocaine together.
- Later, Walker acquired more crack cocaine but refused to share it with Cutwright, stating, "Let me make some money."
- Cutwright offered to trade an unloaded .32 caliber revolver for some of the cocaine, but Walker declined.
- Cutwright then went into an adjacent room, loaded the revolver, and returned to the kitchen.
- He grabbed five rocks of cocaine from a table where Walker was.
- A struggle ensued between the two men, during which Walker was shot in the lower abdomen.
- Cutwright fled the house with the cocaine, which he later smoked.
- Hours later, Cutwright approached Sunrose Rutledge, Jr., a sheriff's department dispatcher, and confessed that he had shot someone.
Procedural Posture:
- The State of Louisiana prosecuted Leroy Cutwright, III, in a state trial court for the killing of Marshall Walker.
- A jury convicted Cutwright of second-degree murder.
- The trial court imposed a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment.
- Cutwright, as appellant, appealed the conviction to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the State of Louisiana, the appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is the evidence sufficient to support a conviction for second-degree murder under a felony-murder theory when the defendant's confession is the primary evidence establishing the underlying robbery, and it is corroborated only by circumstantial physical evidence?
Opinions:
Majority - Brown, Judge
Yes. Sufficient evidence exists to support the second-degree murder conviction. Under the felony-murder doctrine, a killing during the perpetration of a robbery constitutes second-degree murder. The primary legal issue is whether the State sufficiently proved the underlying robbery. The court applies the corpus delicti rule, which requires that the occurrence of a crime be established by evidence independent of a defendant's confession. In this case, the victim's death from a gunshot wound independently established the corpus delicti of a homicide. Once this was established, Cutwright's confession could be used by itself to prove the elements of the underlying felony—robbery. The confession detailed his intent to take the drugs, his use of a loaded weapon, the taking of the cocaine, and the struggle. This confession was further corroborated by circumstantial evidence, including drug paraphernalia at the scene, cocaine in the victim's system, the absence of cocaine at the scene after the event, and the contact nature of the gunshot wound, which suggested a struggle. Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational juror could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Cutwright killed Walker during the perpetration of a robbery.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the application of the corpus delicti rule in felony-murder prosecutions where the defendant's confession is the primary evidence of the underlying felony. It establishes that so long as the core criminal act (the homicide) is proven through independent evidence, the confession can be the sole source of proof for the specific elements that elevate the crime, such as the intent to commit robbery. This precedent strengthens the prosecution's ability to secure felony-murder convictions in cases that lack eyewitnesses to the underlying felony, relying instead on a corroborated confession. It underscores the principle that a confession's trustworthiness is bolstered when its details align with the physical and circumstantial evidence.
