State Of Louisiana v. Karl Johnson

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2023 KW 0368

VERSUS

KARL JOHNSON APRIL 20, 2023

In Re: State of Louisiana, applying for supervisory writs,

19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton

Rouge, No. 01- 19- 0563.

BEFORE: WELCH, PENZATO, AND LANIER, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The district court abused its discretion in

finding the recordings of the 911 calls to be inadmissible,
particularly as the court did not review the 911 call recordings
prior to its ruling. The admission of the 911 calls into
evidence does not violate the Confrontation Clause, and they
fall within the excited utterance exception to the hearsay
rules. See State v. Lee, 2022- 01314 ( La. 11/ 16/ 22), 349 So. 3d
988, 989- 90 ( per curiam). The 911 calls were made by the
victim' s mother immediately after the alleged offenses occurred.
The victim was present during the calls and provided her mother
information regarding the incident. The victim' s mother then
relayed that information to the 911 operator. The calls were

made for the primary purpose of reporting the alleged crimes and
to seek help for the victim, who claimed to have been raped and
was injured. Further, the calls were related to a startling
event and were made while the declarants were still under the
stress of the event. See La. Code Evid. Arts. 803 ( 1) & ( 2).
As set forth in Davis v. Washington, 547 U. S. 828, 126 S. Ct.
2266, 165 L. Ed. 2d 224 ( 2006), statements made for the primary
purpose of seeking help during an ongoing emergency are not

testimonial. Therefore, this matter is remanded to the district
court for further proceedings consistent with this ruling.

JEW
AHP
WIL

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

0.

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT