Court Opinion

ID: 4804672
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-08-21 04:30:57.513389+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:10:20.803688
License: Public Domain

LOVE, J.,
concurs and assigns reasons.
|TI respectfully concur with the result reached by the majority.
Firstly, Mr. Hankton contends that the application of the U.S. Const, amend. VI, as incorporated by U.S. Const, amend. XIV, requires unanimous jury verdicts in state felony trials. However, this assertion has no merit based upon current jurisprudence. See State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311, pp. 6-7 (La.3/17/09), 6 So.3d 738, 742 and State v. Curtis, 11-1676, p. 23 (La.App. 4 Cir. 3/13/13), 112 So.3d 323, 337.
Secondly, Mr. Hankton’s assertion that the provisions of La. Const, art. I, § 17(A) and La.C.Cr.P. art. 782(A), which permits nonunanimous jury verdicts, are unconstitutional was not properly preserved for this Court’s appellate review. See Bertrand, 08-2015, pp. 2-3, 6 So.3d at 739-740.