Jew NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2022 KA 0938 STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS TRE' ANTHONY JAMES Judgment Rendered:

On Appeal from the 23rd Judicial District Court In and for the Parish ofAscension

State of Louisiana Trial Court No. 39,734 

### Honorable Cody M.Martin,Judge Presiding

JeffLandry 

### Attorney General 

### J. TaylorGray Grant Lloyd Willis Matthew B. Derbes Assistant Attorneys General Baton Rouge, Louisiana Attorneys forAppellee, State of Louisiana 

### MAY 18 2023

Lieu T.Vo Clark 

### Attorneyfor Defendant/Appellant, Mandeville, Louisiana 

### Tre'Anthony James

BEFORE; WELCH, PENZATO, AND LANIER,JJ.PENZATO, J.



### The defendant, Tre' Anthony James, was charged by grand jury indictment with two counts of first degree rape, violations of La. R.S. 14: 42. He pled not 

### guilty and, following ajury trial, he was found guilty as charged on count 1. On 

### count 2, he was found guilty ofthe responsive offense of second degree rape, a violation of La. R.S. 14:42. 1. The defendant filed a motion for new trial as to both

counts, which was granted. 

### The State filed an application for supervisory writ. This court granted the State's writ, reversed the trial court ruling granting a new 

### trial, reinstated the convictions on both counts, and remanded for sentencing. The State filed a habitual offender bill of information. 

### Following a hearing on the 

### matter,the defendant was adjudicated a second - felony habitual offender.' For the first degree rape conviction, the trial court sentenced the defendant to life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of

sentence. For the second degree rape conviction, the trial court imposed an 

### enhanced sentence oftwenty years imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 

### The defendant now appeals, designating one assignment of error. We affirm the convictions and sentences. FACTS J.W.2 was an inmate at the Ascension Parish Jail, housed in the same dorm as the defendant and Kaglin Green.' 

### According to J.W.,on the night ofJanuary 10, 2017, he was at a table in the dayroom, a common area in the dorm. 

### The following is J.W.'s account of what then occurred. Green approached J.W. and, when J.W. 

### told Green he would not give Green his food portions the next day, Green " choked The defendant has a prior conviction for simple burglary. 

### 2Thevictim isreferredto hereinby his initials. See La.R.S. 46-.1944(W). 

### 3 In histestimony,J.W.refers toGreen as "Cash."

2out" J.W. Green held J.W.down over the table, with his arms behind his back and

face on the table. The defendant then held J.W.down while Green went to the cell, obtained a razor blade, and gave it to the defendant. The defendant cut open the lower back ofJ.W.'sjumpsuit. The defendant and Green pulled down J.W.'s pants and underwear and put plastic gloves over their penises. The defendant lubricated 

### the glove with lotion and anally raped J.W.' Later that same night, Green anally raped J.W. 

### While apparently no struggle was involved, J.W.relented after Green repeatedly asked him to have sex because J.W. felt resisting would have been futile.

### The following is J.W's account ofwhat occurred the following day,January 11, 2017. 

### J.W.was reading in his bunk. The defendant told J.W.he wanted to talk to him in the dayroom. J.W.went to the dayroom. 

### The defendant repeatedly asked J. W.to have sex, but J.W. refused. The defendant asked, " 

### I'm not going to have to do what they do in the back.,huh? 5 The defendant then suggested that J.W.could 

### give up, orthe defendant could "just take it every night until he leaves" jail. J.W. felt he did not have a choice, so he " gave in." The defendant did not use a glove 

### during this incident. The defendant did nottestify at trial. ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR In his sole assignment of error, the defendant argues the trial court should 

### have granted his motion for new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence that arose when, at Green's subsequent trial, J.W.testified inconsistently from his 

### testimony at the defendant's trial. In response, the State argues that, pursuant to 

### the law ofthe case doctrine, the defendant is procedurally foreclosed from arguing

a Green was indicted as a principal to first degree rape for his alleged participation in this incident. 5 J.W. explained this meant if a person refused, he would be taken to the back, beaten into unconsciousness and raped. 3

### this issue on appeal because this court already adjudicated the issue when it

granted the State' s writ. 

### As discussed below,we find that the State's response has

merit.The law of the case doctrine embodies the rule that an appellate court 

### ordinarily will not reconsider its own rulings on a subsequent appeal in the same

case. 

### The reasons forthe lawofthe case doctrine areto avoid relitigating the same issue; 

### to promote consistency of result in the same litigation; and, to promote 

### efficiency and fairness to both parties by affording a single opportunity for the argument and decision of the matter at issue. State a Chandler, 2017-0962 ( La. 

### App. I Cir. 12121/ 17), 240 So. 3d 950, 952. The doctrine applies to all prior rulings or decisions of an appellate court or the Supreme Court in the same case, 

### not merelythose arising from the full appeal process. Brumfield v Dyson, 418 So. 

### 2d 21, 23 (La.App. 1 Cir.),writ denied, 422 So. 2d 162 ( La. 1982). The law ofthe 

### case doctrine is not an inflexible law,thus appellate courts are not absolutely bound 

### by it and may exercise discretion in its application. The doctrine is not applied in cases of palpable error or where, if the law of the case were applied, manifest injustice would occur. Chandler, 240 So. 3d at 952-53. 

### In the instant matter, following his conviction, the defendant filed a motion for post judgment verdict of acquittal and motion for new trial, which the trial court denied. 

### Thereafter, Green was tried for his role in the January 10, 2017 incident. 

### Following Green's acquittal, the defendant filed a second motion forpost judgment verdict ofacquittal and motion for new trial, alleging newly discovered 

### evidence stemming from Green's trial. The defendant argued that J.W. testified 

### inconsistently in the two trials. 

### The matterwas set for hearing, and, following the hearing,the trial courttookthe matter under advisement. On October 8, 2020, the trial 

### court signed a judgment granting the defendant' s motion for new trial. 

### In its accompanying reasons forjudgment, the

4trial court stated: 

### This Court is ofthe opinion that an injustice is surely done to a defendant who is found guilty of First Degree Rape, which carries a 

### life sentence, when there are such glaring discrepancies in the victim's statements, and the defense was not notified of relevant evidence of 

### another alleged rape by a different perpetrator before trial, which may have allowed it to form a more adequate defense. It is impossible to 

### know whether the jury relied on the alleged fact that Green assisted the defendant] 

### in the January 10' 

### rape to find him guilty of First 

### Degree Rape, but ifthe basis ofthe conviction was thejury's finding that two or more offenders participated in the act, then the conviction should be overturned based on the victim's subsequent retraction of his statements at the trial of Kaglin Green. Likewise, it is impossible 

### to know whether thejury found [the defendant] guilty ofFirst Degree 

### Rape based on him having a dangerous weapon ( i.e., a razorblade), but ifthat was the basis for the verdict, then the conviction should be overturned based on the victim's admission in Green's trial that he never actually saw the razorblade. 

### The inconsistency in the victim's statements creates sufficient doubt to cause one to question whether a 

### just verdict was reached by the jury for First Degree Rape. As such, 

### the Motion for New Trial is granted as to the January 11th, 2017 incident. 

### Similarly, the victim's inconsistent statements regarding the January 10th, 

### 2017 incident, along with the revelation during trial that 

### the victim was also penetrated by another perpetrator during the relevant time period, leads this Court to believe that the ends ofjustice would be served ifthe Defendant were also granted a new trial for the 

### January 11 t", 2017 incident. As such, the Defense' s Motion for New Trial as to both counts in the November S, 2018 indictment is granted. R 165- 66) 

### The State filed an application for supervisory writ, which was granted by this court. 

### State a James, 2020- 1199 ( La.App. 1 Cir. 2118121), 2021 WL 640062
unpublished), cert. denied, 2021- 00400 (La. 6/ l/ 21), 316 So. 3d 834. 

### In reversing 

### thetrial court's granting ofa newtrial,this court specifically found: There are six circumstances under which a defendant can be convicted of first degree rape.' See La. R.S. 14:42(A). 

### Even discounting the 

### two circumstances noted in the district court's ruling, the victim' s 

### uncontroverted testimony established he resisted the actto the utmost, but his resistance was overcome by force. Thus, the defendant's 

### conduct appears to meet at least one ofthe remaining circumstances for first degree rape. 

### Furthermore, the court failed to identify any legal error regarding the jury verdict on count two. Therefore, the 

### State's writ isgranted,the ruling granting a newtrial on both counts is reversed, the convictions on both counts are reinstated, and this case is 

### remanded to the district courtforsentencing on both counts. 6 In 2022, the law was amended, and aseventh circumstance was added. 1The defendant filed a writ of certiorari with the Louisiana Supreme Court,



### which was denied, along with an application for reconsideration. State v ..Tames, 2021- 00400 (La. 611121), 316 So. 3d 834. In this instant appeal, the defendant argues that the trial court's October 8, 

### 2020 rulingwas based on J.W.'s inconsistentstatements creating sufficientdoubt in whether ajust verdict was reached by thejury in the defendant's trial. Thus, the 

### defendant argues that as the trial court's ruling did not grant a new trial based on 

### newly discovered evidence that goes to the credibility ofthe victim in a retrial,this court did not have the opportunity to address that legal basis for a new trial. However, on appeal,the defendant fails to identify any additional facts or evidence that were not previously considered 

### by this court that would warrant reconsideration of this court' s writ disposition. See State v Williams, 2014-0630 

### La.App. 4 Cir. 12118114), 158 So. 3d 107, 111. 

### Finally, based upon our review ofthe record, as well as the applicable law, we conclude thatthe previous decision ofthis court as expressed bythe granting of the State's writ was not clearly, palpably or manifestly erroneous. See Brumfield, 418 So. 2d at 23. Moreover, there is no indication that ifthe law ofthe case were applied in this instance, manifest injustice would occur. See Chandler, 240 So. 3d at 953.Thus, we decline to reverse our previous opinion that the trial court abused 

### its discretion by granting the defendant's motion fornewtrial. CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES AFFIRMED.

0