State Of Louisiana v. Anterio Robinson

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2023 KW 0567

VERSUS

ANTERIO ROBINSON JULY 7, 2023

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

19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton

Rouge, No. DC - 22- 04143.

BEFORE: THERIOT, WOLFE, AND GREENE, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The district court abused its discretion in

the first four minutes and seven seconds of the body
finding
camera footage depicting the victim and her interactions with

the police to be inadmissible as violative of the Confrontation

Clause. We find that the statements made by the victim/ declarant
are nontestimonial. As evidenced from the footage, there was an

situation and the primary purpose of the
ongoing emergency
officer' s questioning was related to the victim' s well- being and
to assess the need for emergency medical services. The

questioning was informal, occurred in the immediate aftermath of
took the scene of the crime. See
the battery, and place at

Davis v. Washington, 547 U. S. 813, 126 S. Ct. 2266, 165 L. Ed. 2d
224 ( 2006) ; Michigan v. Bryant, 562 U. S. 344, 131 S. Ct. 1143,

179 L. Ed. 2d 93 ( 2011) . Additionally, the spontaneous statements

the victim/ declarant to the officer' s
made by pursuant

questioning are admissible under the excited utterance and

present sense impression exceptions to the hearsay rule. See La.

Code Evid. arts. 803 ( 1) & ( 2) ; State v. Lee, 2022- 01314 ( La.

11/ 16/ 22), 349 So. 3d 988, 989- 90 ( per curiam) ; State v. Jordan,

2021- 0585 ( La. App. 4th Cir. 12/ 21/ 21), 334 So. 3d 417, writ

denied, 2022- 00141 ( La. 3/ 2/ 22) 333 So. 3d 834. Therefore, this

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

MRT
EW

HG