State of Louisiana Versus Orlando Washington

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 24-K-351

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

ORLANDO WASHINGTON COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA

August 15, 2024

Linda Wiseman
First Deputy Clerk

IN RE ORLANDO WASHINGTON

APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,
PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE
R. CHRISTOPHER COX, III, DIVISION "B", NUMBER 22-2656

Panel composed of Judges Marc E. Johnson,
Scott U. Schlegel, and Timothy S. Marcel

WRIT DENIED

Relator/Defendant, Orlando Washington, seeks supervisory review of the
trial court’s ruling which granted the State’s “404(B)”1 motion. Relator also seeks
a stay of trial, currently set for August 19, 2024.

On June 16, 2022, a Jefferson Parish Grand Jury returned a true bill of
indictment charging Relator with second-degree murder of Ahmad Howard in
violation of La. R.S. 14:30.1, that occurred on or about February 21, 2022.2 The
State seeks to introduce at trial three YouTube videos, and a photograph depicting
the defendant and another individual charged for the murder of Howard. After
hearing on July 11, 2024, the trial court ruled the evidence would be admissible at
trial. Relator advised of his intention to seek writs and requested a stay.3 The trial
court denied the motion to stay on July 22, 2024. This timely writ application
followed.

1
La. C. E. art. 404 provides in pertinent part:

B. Other crimes, wrongs, or acts; creative or artistic expression. (1)(a) Except as provided in Article 412 or
as otherwise provided by law, evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a
person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes,
such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake or accident,
provided that upon request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in
advance of trial, of the nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial for such purposes, or when it
relates to conduct that constitutes an integral part of the act or transaction that is the subject of the present
proceeding.
2
Daveon Gilmore and Davon Gilmore were also charged with the second-degree murder of Mr. Howard in the same
indictment.
3
Counsel for all three defendants objected to the ruling and orally noticed the State and the trial court of their intent
to seek writs and requested a stay of the proceedings.

1

In his writ application, relator argues the trial court’s granting of State’s
motion was an abuse of its discretion. The State filed notice of its intent to
introduce the You Tube videos and photograph as res gestae and/or La. C.E. ar.
404(B) evidence to prove that defendant and his co-defendants are members of or
associated with a gang known as the “Betty Street Youngins” (BSY) a/k/a “Drizzy
Block.” Attached to the State’s notice were three exhibits: two reports authored by
the Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office (JPSO) and a USB port containing three
YouTube videos and a still photo of defendant and Daveon Gilmore. Relator avers
the State intends to argue that the murder of Mr. Howard was in retaliation for the
murder of Jamarian Price, a BSY member, who was killed nine days earlier.

The July 11, 2024 minute entry shows that State’s Exhibit 1(the JPSO
investigative report B-08071-22), State’s Exhibit 2 (the JPSO investigative report
B-14156-22), and State’s Exhibit 3 (the USB jump drive) were admitted into
evidence for record purposes only. However, relator failed to attach these exhibits
to his writ application and did not attach a copy of the transcript of the hearing
either. Without appropriate attachments, we are unable to view the exhibits, the
transcript, and the reasons, if any, for the trial court’s ruling.

We also find that relator failed to include a copy of the State’s 404(B)
pleading, which is required under Rule 4-5(C)(8) of the Uniform Rules of
Louisiana Courts of Appeal, which states, in relevant part, that the writ application
“shall” contain “a copy of each pleading on which the judgment, order, or ruling
was founded[.]”

In State v. Montoya, 18-K-144 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/29/18) (unpublished writ
disposition), the relator sought review of the trial court’s ruling granting the State’s
notice of intent to use other crimes evidence. We denied relator’s writ application
on the showing made, finding relator failed to provide this Court with a copy of the
hearing transcript. Though the relator had provided a copy of the minute entry
showing the trial court’s ruling, this Court could not adequately decide the merits
of relator’s arguments without a transcript.

Upon review, we find relator’s writ application is deficient. Relator’s failure
to provide the objectionable evidence on which his writ application is based does
not comply with the Uniform Rules of Louisiana Courts of Appeal and prevents us
from complete consideration of this writ application. Accordingly, the writ
application is denied on the showing made and the request for stay is denied.

Gretna, Louisiana, this 15th day of August, 2024.

TSM
MEJ
SUS

2

SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL

CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT

SUSAN S. BUCHHOLZ
FREDERICKA H. WICKER
CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
JUDE G. GRAVOIS
MARC E. JOHNSON
STEPHEN J. WINDHORST LINDA M. WISEMAN
JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR.
FIRST DEPUTY CLERK
SCOTT U. SCHLEGEL
TIMOTHY S. MARCEL 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 08/15/2024 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:

24-K-351
E-NOTIFIED
24th Judicial District Court (Clerk)
R. Christopher Cox, III (DISTRICT JUDGE)
Thomas J. Butler (Respondent)
Powell W. Miller (Relator)

MAILED