State v. Lazaro
125 So. 3d 1134, 2012 WL 5416961, 12 La.App. 3 Cir. 134 (2012)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
For aggravated burglary in an inhabited dwelling under La.R.S. 14:60(2), it is not essential for a person to be physically present in the dwelling at the time of unauthorized entry or when the offender arms himself with a dangerous weapon; rather, it is sufficient that the dwelling is inhabited and the offender arms himself with a dangerous weapon after entering by stealing a weapon and placing it in a readily accessible location.
Facts:
- Marcus Wade returned to his home and realized a burglary was in progress.
- Marcus Wade went outside and called 9-1-1 to report the burglary.
- Two men, one in a white hoodie and the other in a black hoodie, fled Marcus Wade's house, and the man in the black hoodie pulled out a gun and fired several shots at Marcus Wade.
- The men were picked up by a car, and Marcus Wade provided a description of the vehicle to 9-1-1.
- Deputy Christopher Wilrye located a vehicle matching the description and, after signaling it to stop, observed items being thrown out from the rear passenger door before the vehicle briefly drove off and then stopped again.
- Officers recovered a ring, two hoodies (white and black), jewelry identified as Marcus Wade’s wife’s, two backpacks containing electronic equipment, and two handguns (a .357 revolver and a 9mm semi-automatic) from the vehicle or on the side of the road; Marcus Wade had reported three handguns missing from his house.
- Ronald Lazaro, along with Tony Washington and Zachary England, the three men inside the vehicle, were arrested.
- Ronald Lazaro gave a statement to the police admitting his involvement in the burglary, that he had taken a handgun from the house, that he heard shots but didn't know who was shooting, and that he had worn a black hoodie.
Procedural Posture:
- Ronald Lazaro was charged by the State with attempted first degree murder, aggravated burglary, and obstruction of justice.
- A jury in the trial court returned verdicts of not guilty on the attempted first degree murder charge and guilty on the aggravated burglary and obstruction of justice charges.
- The trial court sentenced Ronald Lazaro to eighteen years for aggravated burglary and two years for obstruction of justice, to be served concurrently.
- Ronald Lazaro filed a pro se motion for reconsideration of his sentence in the trial court.
- The trial court denied Ronald Lazaro's motion for reconsideration.
- Ronald Lazaro, as appellant, appealed his convictions and sentences to the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, with the State as 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:
Does the crime of aggravated burglary under La.R.S. 14:60(2) require the victim to be physically present in the dwelling at the exact moment the offender arms himself with a dangerous weapon, or is it sufficient for the offender to arm himself after an unauthorized entry into an inhabited dwelling?
Opinions:
Majority - Amy, Judge
No, the crime of aggravated burglary under La.R.S. 14:60 does not require the contemporaneous presence of both the armed perpetrator and the victim within the dwelling. It is sufficient for the offender to arm himself with a dangerous weapon after entering an inhabited dwelling, regardless of whether a person is actually present at that specific moment. The court applied the Jackson v. Virginia standard for sufficiency of evidence, which requires viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution to determine if any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Louisiana Revised Statute 14:60 defines aggravated burglary, including the element where an offender "[a]fter entering arms himself with a dangerous weapon." The reporter's comment to La.R.S. 14:60 clarifies that for dwellings, "inhabitation is all that is necessary; whether someone is actually there at the time of the crime is unimportant." This interpretation was affirmed in State v. Hicks, which held it is not essential for a person to be present in an inhabited dwelling at the time of unauthorized entry. The defendant's argument that he did not "arm himself" until the stolen gun was removed from the backpack was rejected because he admitted stealing a handgun and placing it in a backpack, where it was "readily available," distinguishing it from cases where a weapon was inaccessible. The court found sufficient evidence that Ronald Lazaro entered an inhabited dwelling without authorization, with intent to commit theft, and armed himself by stealing and possessing a readily available handgun. Regarding the excessive sentence claim, the court reviewed the 18-year sentence for aggravated burglary under La. Const. art. I, § 20, to determine if it was so grossly disproportionate to the crime as to shock the sense of justice or made no measurable contribution to penal goals (State v. Barling). The sentence was within the statutory limits of 1 to 30 years. While Ronald Lazaro was a 19-year-old first felony offender, the trial court noted his pending drug charges and the serious nature of the crime, including arming himself with a stolen weapon and threatening the victim. Comparing the sentence to similar cases in State v. Cormier, State v. Robinson, and State v. Jackson, the court found that Ronald Lazaro’s sentence was not an outlier and that the trial court did not abuse its wide discretion in imposing it.
Analysis:
This case clarifies Louisiana's aggravated burglary statute, specifically reinforcing that the 'inhabited dwelling' element does not require the victim's contemporaneous physical presence during the unauthorized entry or when the offender arms himself. It establishes that merely stealing a dangerous weapon and placing it in a readily accessible location, such as a backpack, within the dwelling is sufficient to meet the 'arms himself' requirement, even before the weapon is brandished. This decision provides critical guidance on the scope of aggravated burglary and the definition of 'arming oneself' in Louisiana, solidifying the distinction from simple burglary. Furthermore, the opinion reiterates the high bar for appellate courts to overturn a sentence as excessive, underscoring the broad discretion afforded to trial courts when imposing sentences within statutory limits, especially when considering the offender's background and the crime's impact.
