State of Louisiana Versus Argentina Mesa

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 18-KA-526

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

ARGENTINA MESA COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA

ON REMAND FROM THE LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT
AN APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA
NO. 15-4323, DIVISION "J"
HONORABLE STEPHEN C. GREFER, JUDGE PRESIDING

September 09, 2020

MARC E. JOHNSON
JUDGE

Panel composed of Judges Jude G. Gravois,
Marc E. Johnson, and Hans J. Liljeberg

CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES AFFIRMED
MEJ
JGG
HJL

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE,
STATE OF LOUISIANA
Paul D. Connick, Jr.
Terry M. Boudreaux
Anne M. Wallis
Laura S. Schneidau
Emily E. Booth

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT,
ARGENTINA MESA
Sherry A. Watters

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE,
STATE OF LOUISIANA, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Jeffrey M. Landry
Colin Clark
J. Taylor Gray

JOHNSON, J.

ON REMAND FROM THE LOUISIANA SUPREME COURT

This matter comes before this Court pursuant to an order of remand from the

Louisiana Supreme Court. See, State v. Mesa, 19-1908 (La. 6/3/20); 296 So.3d

1044. In its order, the supreme court instructed this Court to conduct a new errors

patent review in light of the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Ramos v.

Louisiana, --- U.S. ---, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 206 L.Ed.2d 583 (2020). For the following

reasons, we affirm Defendant’s convictions and sentences.

As noted in this Court’s previous opinion, Defendant was charged with

forcible rape of a juvenile1 (D.O.B. 8/29/2000) in violation of La. R.S. 14:42.1

(count one), sexual battery of a juvenile (D.O.B. 8/29/2000) in violation of La.

R.S. 14:43.1 (count two), and sexual battery of a juvenile under 13 years of age

(D.O.B. 5/27/2005) in violation of La. R.S. 14:43.1 (count three). State v. Mesa,

18-526 (La. App. 5 Cir. 11/27/19); 287 So.3d 89, 95, writ granted and remanded,

19-1908 (La. 6/3/20); 296 So.3d 1044. At the conclusion of the trial on March 20,

2018, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty on count one and guilty as charged

on counts two and three. Id. at 100. The trial court sentenced Defendant on count

two (sexual battery of a juvenile) to ten years imprisonment without the benefit of

parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, and 25 years in the Department of

Corrections2 without the benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence on

count three (sexual battery of a juvenile under 13 years of age). Id. at 101. The

1
In the interest of protecting minor victims and victims of sexual offenses as set forth in La. R.S.
46:1844(W)(3), the judges of this Court have adopted a policy that this Court’s published work will use
only initials to identify the victim and any defendant or witness whose name can lead to the victim’s
identity (i.e., parent, sibling, or relative with the same last name as the victim). State v. Ross, 14-84 (La.
App. 5 Cir. 10/15/14); 182 So.3d 983, 985 n.3.
2
Although the trial court did not state that Defendant’s sentence on count three was to be served
at hard labor, “a sentence committing a prisoner to the Department of Corrections is necessarily at hard
labor.” State v. Lawson, 04-334 (La. App. 5 Cir. 9/28/04); 885 So.2d 618 (citing State v. Lisenby, 534
So.2d 996, 998 (La. App. 3d Cir.1988)).

18-KA-526 1

trial court further ordered the sentences imposed on counts two and three to be

served consecutively to one another. Id.

On appeal, Defendant challenged her convictions by a non-unanimous jury

as one of her assigned errors. This Court found that Defendant did not properly

preserve the issue for appeal. State v. Mesa, 287 So.3d at 112. At the time of

Defendant’s convictions, non-unanimous jury verdicts were permissible under La.

Const. Art. I, § 17, La. C.Cr.P. art 782, and the applicable jurisprudence. This

Court affirmed Defendant’s convictions and sentences. Id. at 118.

Thereafter, on April 20, 2020, the United States Supreme Court handed

down its decision in Ramos v. Louisiana, supra, where the United States Supreme

Court found that the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial—as incorporated

against the states by the Fourteenth Amendment—requires a unanimous verdict to

convict a defendant of a serious offense.3 It held, “Wherever we might look to

determine what the term ‘trial by an impartial jury trial’ meant at the time of the

Sixth Amendment’s adoption—whether it’s the common law, state practices in the

founding era, or opinions and treatises written soon afterward—the answer is

unmistakable. A jury must reach a unanimous verdict in order to convict.” Id. at

1395. The Court concluded, “There can be no question either that the Sixth

Amendment’s unanimity requirement applies to state and federal trials

equally…So if the Sixth Amendment’s right to a jury trial requires a unanimous

verdict to support a conviction in federal court, it requires no less in state court.”

Id. at 1397. According to Ramos, Louisiana will have to retry defendants who

were convicted of serious offenses by non-unanimous juries, and whose cases are

still pending on direct appeal.

3
For purposes of the Sixth Amendment, federal law defines petty offenses as offenses subject to
imprisonment of six months or less and serious offenses as offenses subject to imprisonment over six
months. See generally, Lewis v. United States, 518 U.S. 322, 327-28, 116 S.Ct. 2163, 135 L.Ed.2d 590
(1996); Hill v. Louisiana, 2013WL486691 (E.D. La. 2013).

18-KA-526 2

Following the Ramos decision, the Louisiana Supreme Court granted

Defendant’s writ application that challenged his convictions and sentences and

remanded the matter to this Court to conduct a new errors patent review in light of

Ramos. See, State v. Mesa, 296 So.3d at 1044. Upon remand, the State filed a

motion to supplement the record with the jury polling slips, asserting that each of

the sexual battery convictions were rendered by unanimous juries. The State’s

motion was granted, and the Clerk of Court for the 24th Judicial District Court was

ordered to supplement the record with the jury polling slips. The polling slips

reflected that the verdicts were unanimous for counts two and three.

Defendant was convicted of sexual battery of a juvenile (count two), and

sexual battery of a juvenile under 13 years of age (count three). Since the

punishments for these offenses are all necessarily confinement at hard labor, a jury

of twelve persons was required. See La. Const. Art. I, § 17; La. C.Cr.P. art. 782;

La. R.S. 14:42.1; La. R.S. 14:43.1. Because the jury verdicts for counts three and

four were unanimous, we find that there is no error that requires corrective action,

pursuant to Ramos, and Defendant is not entitled to relief. We, therefore, will not

disturb our original opinion.

DECREE

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm Defendant’s convictions and sentences.

CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCES AFFIRMED

18-KA-526 3

SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL

CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT

MARY E. LEGNON
FREDERICKA H. WICKER
CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
JUDE G. GRAVOIS
MARC E. JOHNSON
ROBERT A. CHAISSON SUSAN BUCHHOLZ
STEPHEN J. WINDHORST
FIRST DEPUTY CLERK
HANS J. LILJEBERG
JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR. FIFTH CIRCUIT
MELISSA C. LEDET
JUDGES 101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053)
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF
POST OFFICE BOX 489
GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054 (504) 376-1400

(504) 376-1498 FAX
www.fifthcircuit.org

NOTICE OF JUDGMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY
I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE OPINION IN THE BELOW-NUMBERED MATTER HAS BEEN DELIVERED
IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURT OF APPEAL, RULE 2-16.4 AND 2-16.5 THIS DAY
SEPTEMBER 9, 2020 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, CLERK OF COURT, COUNSEL OF RECORD AND ALL PARTIES
NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:

18-KA-526
E-NOTIFIED
24TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT (CLERK)
HONORABLE STEPHEN C. GREFER (DISTRICT JUDGE)
ANNE M. WALLIS (APPELLEE) TERRY M. BOUDREAUX (APPELLEE) THOMAS J. BUTLER (APPELLEE)
SHERRY A. WATTERS (APPELLANT) GRANT L. WILLIS (APPELLEE) J. TAYLOR GRAY (APPELLEE)

MAILED
HONORABLE JEFFREY M. LANDRY HONORABLE PAUL D. CONNICK, JR.
(APPELLEE) (APPELLEE)
ATTORNEY GENERAL DISTRICT ATTORNEY
LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EMILY E. BOOTH (APPELLEE)
1885 NORTH 3RD STREET LAURA S. SCHNEIDAU (APPELLEE)
6TH FLOOR, LIVINGSTON BUILDING ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
BATON ROUGE, LA 70802 TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
200 DERBIGNY STREET
GRETNA, LA 70053