State of Louisiana Versus Eric D. Calvin

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal
State of Louisiana

No. 26-K-445

STATE OF LOUISIANA

versus

ERIC D. CALVIN

IN RE ERIC D. CALVIN
APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
COURT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE
STEPHEN C. GREFER, DIVISION "J", No. 24-3100

September 22, 2026

Panel composed of Judges Susan M. Chehardy,
Fredericka Homberg Wicker, and Scott U. Schlegel

WRIT DENIED

Relator, Eric D. Calvin, seeks expedited review of the trial court’s

September 21, 2026 ruling. According to the writ, the trial court granted the

State’s Notice of Intent to Introduce Evidence Under La. C.E. Article 404(B) with

respect to State Exhibits 5 and 6. A jury trial is scheduled to begin on September

22, 2026. According to the writ, Relator is charged with one count of simple

robbery, in violation of La. R.S. 14:65. Relator, however, did not attach a copy of

the judgment or minute entry that sets forth the ruling of the trial court. On this

basis alone, the writ should be denied. See Uniform Rules - Courts of Appeal,

Rule 4-5. Notwithstanding, on the showing made, we cannot say the trial court

abused its discretion.

The State alleges that Relator walked to the cooler area of the Walgreen’s

drugstore, then approached the cashier with a beer in hand and waited in line to

check out. The cashier scanned the item and Relator produced cash and coins from

his pocket. When the cashier opened the register, Relator reached across the

counter and grabbed a handful of cash from the till. The cashier grabbed the

money back and the two struggled over the cash until Relator relinquished his hold

on the money and fled the store.

The State’s 404(B) motion seeks to admit admissible evidence related to

Exhibit 5, consisting of a 14-page police report, in which Relator was alleged to

have stolen $64.45 from a McKenzie’s on Airline Drive on September 30, 1997,

and Exhibit 6, a 3-page incident report which alleged that Relator committed an

armed robbery at an EZ Serve on October 4, 1997. In this incident he threatened

the cashier, told the cashier he had a gun, and unsuccessfully attempted to open the

cash register, and thereafter fled on a bicycle.

A trial court’s ruling as to the admissibility of other crimes evidence is

reviewed for an abuse of discretion. State v. Kiger, 13-69 (La. App. 5 Cir.

10/30/13), 128 So.3d 552, 557. Absent an abuse of discretion, a trial court’s ruling

on the admissibility of evidence pursuant to La. C.E. art. 404(B)(1) will not be

disturbed. State v. Jenkins, 18-645 (La. App. 5 Cir. 4/3/19), 267 So.3d 203, 207,

writ denied, 19-1223 (La. 10/21/19), 280 So.3d 1169.

Generally, evidence of other crimes or bad acts committed by a criminal

defendant is not admissible at trial. State v. Neveaux, 23-477 (La. App. 5 Cir.

11/10/23), 377 So.3d 749, 757, writ denied, 23-1633 (La. 3/12/24), 381 So.3d 56.

Courts may not admit evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts of a criminal

defendant in order to show that the defendant is a person of bad character who has

acted in conformity therewith. La. C.E. art. 404(B); State v. Hardy, 14-1569 (La.

11/21/14), 154 So.3d 537, 538. However, when evidence of other crimes tends to

prove a material issue and has independent relevance other than to show that the

defendant is of bad character, it may be admitted by certain statutory and

jurisprudential exceptions to this rule. Jenkins, 267 So.3d at 207. The State may

introduce evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts if it establishes an independent

and relevant reason for its admissibility, such as to show motive, opportunity,

intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.

La. C.E. art. 404(B); Hardy, 154 So.3d at 538. “Other crimes” evidence must tend

to prove a material fact at issue or to rebut a defendant’s defense. State v. Taylor,

16-1124 (La. 12/1/16), 217 So.3d 283, 292.

Relator admits that he is the one on the video who took the money from the

register but denies that he used force or intimidation. The State, however, argues

that Relator and the cashier then struggled over the cash. Thus, while identity

might not be an issue, intent may be depending upon Relator’s defense at trial.

Accordingly, we cannot say that the trial court abused its discretion in

granting the State’s Notice of Intent. The State must, nevertheless, introduce

admissible evidence related to the other incidents noted in State’s Exhibits 5 and 6.

Finally, we note that Relator has an adequate remedy upon appeal.

The writ is denied.

Gretna, Louisiana, this 22nd day of September, 2026.

SUS
SMC
FHW

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. TRAN
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 09/22/2026 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:

26-K-445
E-NOTIFIED
24th Judicial District Court (Clerk)
Honorable Stephen C. Grefer (DISTRICT JUDGE)
Rachel I. Conner (Relator) Darren A. Allemand (Respondent)

MAILED
Rachel E. Warren (Respondent)
Assistant District Attorney
Twenty-Fourth Judicial District
200 Derbigny Street
Gretna, LA 70053