State v. Trung Le
243 So. 3d 637 (2018)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Louisiana's agency theory of felony manslaughter, a defendant cannot be convicted of manslaughter for the death of a bystander who was killed by a bullet fired by the defendant's opponent in a gunfight. However, the defendant's act of engaging in the gunfight may constitute criminal negligence, supporting a conviction for the lesser-included offense of negligent homicide.
Facts:
- Justin Odom was involved in an attempted marijuana sale in the French Quarter, during which one of the potential buyers pulled a forty-caliber weapon and robbed him of his marijuana.
- Following the robbery, Odom called his friend, the defendant Trung Le, and asked him to come to the French Quarter.
- Later, while Le was with Odom and their friends on Bourbon Street, an unknown male approached their group and confronted Odom.
- Odom shoved the unknown male, who then allegedly announced "I got that .40" and pulled out a gun.
- In response, Le stepped forward and fired a nine-millimeter handgun four times at the unknown male.
- The unknown male immediately returned fire, shooting ten or eleven times from a forty-caliber weapon down the crowded street.
- A bullet fired by the unknown male struck and killed an innocent bystander, Ms. Thomas.
- Le and Odom fled the scene and traveled to Mississippi.
Procedural Posture:
- A grand jury indicted the defendant, Trung Le, on one count of manslaughter for the death of Ms. Thomas and one count of attempted second degree murder for shooting at the unknown male.
- The defendant pleaded not guilty to both charges at the trial court.
- Following a jury trial, the defendant was found guilty of manslaughter as charged and guilty of the lesser-included offense of attempted manslaughter.
- The defendant's motion for a new trial was denied by the trial court.
- The trial court sentenced the defendant to forty years for manslaughter and twenty years for attempted manslaughter, with the sentences to run consecutively.
- The defendant (appellant) appealed the conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.
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 a defendant commit felony manslaughter under Louisiana law when he engages in a gunfight and his opponent's return fire kills an innocent bystander?
Opinions:
Majority - Unspecified (Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit)
No, a defendant does not commit felony manslaughter under these circumstances. Louisiana jurisprudence, established in State v. Garner, adheres to the agency test for felony homicide, which requires that the fatal act must be committed by the defendant or an accomplice, not by a third party acting in opposition. Since it is undisputed that the unknown male—the defendant's opponent—fired the shot that killed Ms. Thomas, the defendant cannot be considered the legal 'offender' under the felony manslaughter statute. The court therefore vacated the manslaughter conviction. However, the court found the evidence sufficient to support a conviction for the lesser-included offense of negligent homicide. The defendant's act of firing a gun on a crowded street, knowing the other person was also armed, was a gross deviation from the standard of care, and it was reasonably foreseeable that an innocent bystander could be killed in the ensuing crossfire. The court also affirmed the defendant's conviction for attempted manslaughter of the unknown male, finding that a rational jury could reject his self-defense claim based on his flight from the scene, which indicates a consciousness of guilt, and the conflicting testimony.
Dissenting in part and concurring in part - Belsome, J.
No, the defendant's conduct does not support a conviction for manslaughter. The dissent concurs with the majority's decision to vacate the manslaughter conviction. However, the dissent disagrees with affirming the attempted manslaughter conviction and entering a judgment for negligent homicide. The State failed to meet its burden to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted in self-defense. The only two eyewitnesses, presented by the State, both testified that the unknown male was the aggressor and pulled a gun first. The State's primary rebuttal was speculative opinion testimony from a detective interpreting unclear video footage. Because the State failed to disprove self-defense, the defendant's actions cannot be considered criminally negligent, and therefore, the conviction should not be modified to negligent homicide but should be vacated entirely.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms Louisiana's strict adherence to the agency theory for felony murder and manslaughter, setting it apart from jurisdictions that apply a broader proximate cause theory. The ruling clarifies that a defendant who provokes a gunfight is not liable for a resulting homicide unless their own bullet, or that of an accomplice, causes the death. The court's novel step of modifying the verdict to negligent homicide provides a new avenue for holding defendants accountable for deaths resulting from their criminally negligent conduct of engaging in public shootouts, even when they are not the direct killers. This creates a significant precedent for future cases involving bystander deaths in crossfire situations.
