Court Opinion

ID: 9889563
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-10 17:18:16.944375+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:40:59.934124
License: Public Domain

STATE        OF    LOUISIANA                                                                                   NO.        2023         KW     0723
                                                                                                                           PAGE          1    OF    2

VERSUS

JOHN      JACOB         JENKINS                                                                          OCTOBER                10,          2023

In     Re:             John        Jacob              Jenkins,               applying             for        supervisory                     writs,

                       22nd        Judicial                 District           Court,             Parish         of       St.          Tammany,
                       No.        3085- F- 2020.

BEFORE:                McCLENDON,                 HESTER,              AND    MILLER,             JJ.

         WRIT           GRANTED                  IN        PART         AND        DENIED            IN        PART.                   Relevant

                                                                                                  tendency             to            make          the
evidence               means            evidence                 having             any
                         of                        fact           that             is        of         consequence                     to         the
existence                              any
determination                     of    the        action more                 probable              or      less      probable                   than
it     would           be     without              the          evidence.                 La.        Code       Evid.               art.          401.

Other         crimes              evidence                 is      admissible                  under          the         integral                 act

                                   known      res                                       gestae)              when         the          evidence
exception (               formerly       as

relates           to     conduct that constitutes                                       an     integral part                    of       the       act
or     transaction                     that       is       the         subject           of     the       present            proceeding.

See      State          v.        Brewington,                    601         So. 2d       656,          657 (     La.           1992) (            per

curiam).                 Integral                 act           evidence            in       Louisiana               incorporates                         a

rule         of    narrative                  completeness                    without             which         the        State' s               case

would         lose       its           narrative                momentum            and       cohesiveness.                          See      State

v.     Taylor,              2001- 1638 (               La.        1/    14/ 03),          838      So. 2d        729,           741,          cert.

denied,           540        U.   S.     1103,             124     S.   Ct.        1036,          157     L. Ed. 2d          886 (           2004) .

See       also          State            v.        Calloway,                  2018- 1396 (               La.         App.             1st         Cir.

4/    12/ 19),         276        So. 3d         133,           writ     denied,              2019- 00869 (               La.        1/ 20/ 21),

308      So. 3d         1164.               Current              cases        question              whether            the           integral -

act      evidence                 under          La.       Code         Evid.           art.       404( B)       remains                  subject

                                                                        Code        Evid.          art.        403.          Taylor,               838
to the balancing test of La.
So. 2d        at       745.             In        this          case,         the        prejudicial                  effect               of      the

evidence            admitted                does       not        substantially outweigh its probative
value.             Thus,           we       need       not        decide           whether           integral -act                     evidence

presented               under           the        authority                  of    La.           Code       Evid.          art.             404( B)

                                                       the       balancing                test          of     Article                403.         See
must         invariably                 pass

Taylor,           838       So. 2d          at    745.

          The          video            recordings                     recovered               from          relator'           s      cellular

phone         are       not        other           crimes              or     acts       within           the        meaning                 of    La.

Code         Evid.           art.           404( B).                   Instead,           the        video           recordings                    are

evidence            of       conduct             that           constitute              an     integral          part           of       the       act
     death                                                       that         is        the       subject            of     the           present
                  by     drug           overdose)

                             as        provided             for         by    La.        Code       Evid.        art.               404 ( B) (     1) .
proceeding,
In      addition,                  the        recordings                     place           the        victim            with            relator

                   before              or     contemporaneous                       with           her       death.                 Thus,          the
shortly
State         has        established                       an    independent                   and       relevant               reason             for

admission              of     the       video              recordings              in ( IMG_ 0259)0259)              and (          IMG_ 0263).0263).
Prior        to     admission                 of       the       recordings,                 the     district              court             should
include           an     instruction                       informing           the        jury          of    the      nature                of    the
evidence,                that           the            evidence               consists               of        video                recordings

obtained               from        relator'            s    cellular               phone,          and        that         the         evidence

is not being offered to prove the allegations,                                                                 but        for        the      sole
                           STATE OF LOUISIANA

                                                                       ffqs-
                                                                         ' m

                                                                2023    KW   0723
                                                                 PAGE    2   OF    2

purpose of providing a complete picture of what transpired on
the    date    in    question.         However,    because   the     same    conduct        that

is    captured       in    the   first   recording (   IMG —0255)      is    also       captured

in    the     second                 IMG - 0259),        the       ruling     denying        the
                         recording (
request       to    exclude the  first recording (           IMG    0255)     is       reversed.

In    all   other    respects,      the writ      application    is denied.

                                             PMC
                                             CHH

        Miller,      J.,    concurs.