State of Louisiana Versus Shawn Briscoe and Lance McIntyre

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 22-K-430

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

SHAWN BRISCOE AND LANCE MCINTYRE COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA

September 16, 2022

Mary E. Legnon
Chief Deputy Clerk

IN RE STATE OF LOUSIANA

APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,
PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE DONALD L. FORET,
DIVISION "H", NUMBER 16-5524

Panel composed of Judges Marc E. Johnson,
Stephen J. Windhorst, and John J. Molaison, Jr.

WRIT GRANTED; REQUEST FOR STAY DENIED AS MOOT

Relator, the State of Louisiana,1 seeks review of the trial court’s September
14, 2022 ruling that denied the parties’ oral joint motion for continuance of the trial
scheduled for September 19, 2022. The State intends to pursue additional DNA
testing, and a Daubert hearing has been set. The State asserts that the trial should
be continued out of fairness to defense counsel and in the interest of ensuring that
the defendants’ constitutional rights to a fair trial are honored.

The decision to grant or deny a motion for continuance rests within the sound
discretion of the trial judge, and a reviewing court will not disturb such a
determination absent a clear abuse of discretion. State v. Johnson, 96-950 (La. App.
4 Cir. 8/20/97), 706 So.2d 468, 478-79. A showing of specific prejudice is generally
required to demonstrate that the trial court erred in denying the continuance. Id.

On the showing made, we find that the trial court abused its discretion in
denying the joint motion to continue trial under the circumstances presented.2 In the
writ application, the State admits that its late disclosure of DNA evidence—coupled
with the trial court’s denial of the motion in limine filed by Defendants, Shawn
Briscoe and Land McIntyre, to exclude that evidence—will prejudice Defendants
from fully preparing for trial, if the continuance is not granted. While we
acknowledge the trial judge’s vast discretion controlling his docket, we agree with
the State and find that a denial of the continuance of the September 19, 2022 trial
date would prejudice Defendants.

1
Although the State is the relator in this matter, the attorneys for the defendants, Shawn Briscoe and Lance
McIntyre, also signed the instant writ application.
2
A transcript of the September 14, 2022 hearing was not available for the panel’s review.

Accordingly, we grant the writ application and reverse the trial court’s ruling
that denied the joint motion to continue the trial scheduled for September 19, 2022,
and direct the trial court to continue the matter to a later date convenient to the court
and the parties. The request for stay is denied as moot.

Gretna, Louisiana, this 16th day of September, 2022.

MEJ
SJW
JJM

SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL

CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT

SUSAN S. BUCHHOLZ
FREDERICKA H. WICKER
INTERIM CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
JUDE G. GRAVOIS
MARC E. JOHNSON
ROBERT A. CHAISSON LINDA M. WISEMAN
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 DISPOSITION CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY
I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE DISPOSITION IN THE FOREGOING MATTER HAS BEEN
TRANSMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURT OF APPEAL, RULE 4-6 THIS
DAY 09/16/2022 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, THE TRIAL COURT CLERK OF COURT, AND AT LEAST ONE OF
THE COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR EACH PARTY, AND TO EACH PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY
COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:

22-K-430
E-NOTIFIED
24th Judicial District Court (Clerk)
Honorable Donald L. Foret (DISTRICT JUDGE)
Thomas J. Butler (Relator) Anna L. Friedberg (Respondent)
Darren A. Allemand (Relator)

MAILED
Anthony J. Angelette, Jr. (Respondent) Honorable Paul D. Connick, Jr. (Relator)
Attorney at Law District Attorney
401 Whitney Avenue Twenty-Fourth Judicial District
Suite 406 200 Derbigny Street
Gretna, LA 70053 Gretna, LA 70053