State of Louisiana v. Torail Ladell Thomas

Judgment rendered July 16, 2025.
Application for rehearing may be filed
within the delay allowed by Art. 922,
La. C. Cr. P.

No. 56,373-KA

COURT OF APPEAL
SECOND CIRCUIT
STATE OF LOUISIANA

*****

STATE OF LOUISIANA Appellee

versus

TORAIL LADELL THOMAS Appellant

*****

Appealed from the
First Judicial District Court for the
Parish of Caddo, Louisiana
Trial Court No. 392,346

Honorable Michael A. Pitman, Judge

*****

LOUISIANA APPELLATE PROJECT Counsel for Appellant
By: Edward K. Bauman

TORAIL LADELL THOMAS Pro Se

JAMES EDWARD STEWART, SR. Counsel for Appellee
District Attorney

REBECCA ARMAND EDWARDS
SAMUEL S. CRICHTON
Assistant District Attorneys

*****

Before STONE, THOMPSON, and ROBINSON, JJ.

ROBINSON, J.

Torail Thomas was found guilty as charged by a unanimous jury

verdict of second degree murder, obstruction of justice, and possession of a

firearm or carrying a concealed weapon by a person convicted of certain

felonies.

For his second degree murder conviction, Thomas was sentenced to

life imprisonment at hard labor without the benefit of probation, parole, or

suspension of sentence. For his felon in possession of a firearm conviction,

Thomas was sentenced to 20 years at hard labor without the benefit of

probation, parole, or suspension of sentence, and received a fine of $5,000.

For the obstruction of justice conviction, Thomas was sentenced to 30 years

at hard labor. The sentences were ordered to be served consecutively one to

another.

Thomas’s appellate counsel has filed a brief in compliance with

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L. Ed. 2d 493 (1967);

State v. Jyles, 96-2669 (La. 12/12/97), 704 So. 2d 241; and State v.

Benjamin, 573 So. 2d 528 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1990). Appellate counsel has

also filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record.

For the following reasons, we grant the motion to withdraw, affirm

Thomas’s convictions, vacate the fine, affirm his remaining sentences, and

remand with instructions.

FACTS

Da’Twaine Jambor Broomfield was shot and killed by Torail Thomas

early in the afternoon on November 10, 2022. The killing took place at

Thomas’s apartment located in a house on Boulevard Street in Shreveport.

On February 15, 2023, Thomas was indicted for the second degree

murder of Broomfield in violation of La. R.S. 14:30.1, for possession of a

firearm or carrying a concealed weapon by a person convicted of certain

felonies in violation of La. R.S. 14:95.1, and for obstruction of justice in

violation of La. R.S. 14:130.1.

A jury trial commenced in June of 2024. John Gadzinski lived in the

apartment directly below Thomas’s apartment. Gadzinski testified that on

the afternoon of the murder, he could hear a conversation upstairs. He was

unable to tell if they were arguing, but there was no yelling or screaming.

He heard a grouping of shots, then a pause, followed by two shots. He next

heard what he thought was the sound of a body hitting the floor. As he was

on the phone with a 9-1-1 operator, he saw Thomas lob something into a

neighbor’s yard. Thomas then came to his door and told Gadzinski that

there was a dead body in his apartment.

Detective Amanda Peele is with the Shreveport Police Department.

Some footage from her body camera video was played for the jury. When

Peele arrived on scene, she was instructed to take Thomas into custody.

She advised him of his Miranda rights. Thomas told Peele that he and

Broomfield were smoking methamphetamine (“meth”) when he got up to go

to the bathroom. He heard several shots while in there, and when he exited

the bathroom, he found Broomfield on the floor with gunshot wounds.

Although he told Peele that someone was out to get Broomfield, he had no

idea who came into his apartment and shot Broomfield. He never mentioned

having to resort to self-defense to Peele.

Peele noticed that Thomas was sweating profusely, which went along

with his claim of smoking meth, so she called for Shreveport Fire
2

Department personnel to assess him. Thomas was cleared to be returned to

her custody.

Officers from the crime scene unit testified about what they

discovered. Corporal Christopher Collins found a Taurus slide and barrel, a

spring, and a magazine under Thomas’s house. The lower part of the gun,

which consisted of the handle and the trigger, was not found. Corporal

Jonathan Varnell was the lead crime scene investigator on the case. He

testified that seven 9mm rounds were found in the magazine. Three

expended cartridge casings were found in the apartment.

Sgt. Monique Coleman and a detective interviewed Thomas at the

police station. Parts of the interview were played for the jury. Thomas

initially said he was in his apartment with Broomfield when he left the room

to go to the bathroom. While in the bathroom, he heard gunshots and came

out to find Broomfield dead.

Thomas changed his story as Coleman and the detective began to

leave the interview room. He said Broomfield came over to get a handgun

that Thomas had bought from Broomfield. Thomas explained that he bought

the gun from Broomfield for $150 with the understanding that Broomfield

could buy it back. When Broomfield showed up the day of his murder,

Thomas told Broomfield that he would sell it back at a higher price because

he wanted to make a profit. According to Thomas, Broomfield lunged at

him as they discussed the gun. Thomas then fired a couple of times at

Broomfield, who went to his knees. He then fired additional shots at

Broomfield until he collapsed to the ground. Thomas told Coleman and the

detective that he did not see a weapon on Broomfield and did not want to

3

find out if he had one. Thomas also said that he disassembled the firearm

and then began throwing it in various places in the yard.

Thomas said during his interview that he had been smoking drugs

since early that morning. However, Coleman had no evidence that Thomas

was under the influence of narcotics at the time of the interview, which took

place approximately 3.5 hours after the police had been called to the scene.

Coleman testified that the only evidence that Thomas had smoked

meth was his own statement. Thomas indicated that he had gotten rid of a

tin of narcotics. However, no meth was found under the house or on

adjacent property despite several officers canvassing the area. Only

synthetic marijuana was found in the apartment.

Coleman testified that Thomas did not say that he had any injuries,

bruises, or scratches. She saw no physical injuries on him.

Dr. James Traylor testified regarding the autopsy results. Broomfield

was struck by four projectiles. The four gunshots were determined to be in

the distant range of fire, which is at least a foot and half away. Broomfield

had one penetrating wound to the left abdominal sidewall, and the

projectile’s track was left to right, front to back, and top to bottom. He had a

perforating wound to the lateral left chest wall, and the projectile’s track was

left to right, front to back, and bottom to top. He had a perforating wound to

the anteromedial right chest, and the projectile’s track was left to right, front

to back, and bottom to top. He had a perforating wound to the lateral upper

left arm, and the projectile’s track was front to back and bottom to top.

Blood was found in his abdominal cavity as well as in both pleural spaces.

Meth, marijuana, and synthetic marijuana were found in Broomfield’s blood.

4

Sergeant John Madjerick testified as an expert in fingerprint

examination and analysis. In 2016, Thomas pled guilty as charged to

possession with intent to distribute a Schedule 1 controlled dangerous

substance. He received a five-year hard labor sentence. Madjerick testified

that the fingerprints associated with that predicate conviction matched the

fingerprints that he had taken in court.

After the state rested, Thomas elected to testify on his own behalf.

He testified that Broomfield came to his apartment for Thomas to try some

new meth that Broomfield had. They smoked the meth and some synthetic

marijuana. Thomas claimed that he had also smoked meth and synthetic

marijuana before Broomfield arrived. Thomas explained that synthetic

marijuana, which is his drug of choice, caused him to have blackouts, hear

voices, and see things. He also explained that he was diagnosed with

paranoid schizophrenia in 2001, and did not take his prescribed medicines

regularly.

Thomas testified that Broomfield asked if he still had the handgun,

and then became upset because he did not have enough money to buy it

back. Broomfield jumped up, looked to see if they were alone, grabbed a

vacuum cleaner, and lunged toward Thomas. Thomas, who was lying back

on a futon, pulled out the handgun that he carried. Thomas claimed that he

told Broomfield to stop, but Broomfield kept lunging at him. He was scared,

so he shot Broomfield, who stumbled back about two feet, went down to his

knees, but then got back up. Thomas claimed that Broomfield was still

lunging toward him when he fired a second shot, and then he fired a third

shot because Broomfield kept approaching him after the second shot.

5

Thomas maintained that he fired three shots. After the third shot was fired,

Broomfield paused before falling over to the side.

Thomas stated that he panicked after the shooting. He disassembled

the gun before throwing parts of it under his building. He also claimed that

he threw drugs over the fence. He then knocked on his neighbor John

Gadzinski’s window to tell him what had happened.

Thomas testified that he lied to the police about what occurred

because he was scared, but he told the truth at the end of the interview. He

maintained that he shot Broomfield because he thought his life was in

danger. He was concerned that Broomfield would try to take the gun from

him and kill him with it. He thought that Broomfield was being aggressive

when he jumped up and came at him with the vacuum cleaner.

Thomas admitted that he is a felon and that he should not have

possessed the firearm.

On June 27, 2024, the jury found Thomas guilty as charged on all

counts.

Sentencing was held on July 15, 2024. For his second degree murder

conviction, Thomas was sentenced to life imprisonment at hard labor

without the benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. For the

felon in possession of a firearm conviction, Thomas was sentenced to 20

years at hard labor without the benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of

sentence, and a fine of $5,000 was imposed. For the obstruction of justice

conviction, Thomas was sentenced to 30 years at hard labor. The sentences

were ordered to be served consecutively one to another.

6

On August 14, 2024, defense counsel filed a motion to reconsider

sentence. He argued that Thomas’s sentence was excessive, without

mentioning a particular sentence. The motion was denied.

Thomas’s appeal counsel filed an Anders brief in which he maintained

that the record did not support any nonfrivolous claims. Appeal counsel also

filed a motion to withdraw.

On April 23, 2025, this court ordered that the motion to withdraw be

held in abeyance. This court notified Thomas that he had 10 days from the

date of the order to file a written request to review the record. Thomas was

also notified that he had 30 days from the date of the order to file an appeal

brief.

On April 25, 2025, Thomas a filed a motion to file a pro se

supplemental brief. On April 29, 2025, this court granted Thomas

permission to file a pro se supplemental brief within 24 days from the date

of receipt of the order and the receipt of the records mailed to him.

Our records reflect that the record was sent to the prison housing

Thomas on April 29, 2025. The records were returned on May 8, 2025.

Thomas’s pro se brief was due on May 23, 2025. He did not file a brief.

DISCUSSION

Our review of this record reveals no nonfrivolous errors regarding

Thomas’s convictions or sentences. The evidence supporting the convictions

is overwhelming. Thomas admitted to disassembling the gun and discarding

its parts under the house. Thomas’s status as a felon at the time of the

murder was established, and he acknowledged that he should not have been

in possession of a firearm. The evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt

that the homicide was not committed in self-defense. Thomas gave several
7

versions of what occurred. At first, he claimed that he was in the bathroom

when the shots were fired. Next, he told the police that he shot Broomfield

when he lunged him. Thomas did not know if Broomfield was armed and

did not want to find out. At trial, he claimed that Broomfield was armed

with a vacuum cleaner.

At sentencing, the trial court considered the relevant La. C. Cr. P. art.

894.1 factors in great detail. It also considered Thomas’s criminal history.

The court noted its opposition to parole for Thomas should the law ever

change and Thomas become eligible for parole.

Thomas’s sentence for second degree murder is the mandatory life

sentence. While his sentence and fine for his felon in possession of a

firearm conviction are the maximum allowed, his sentence of 30 years for

obstruction of justice is significantly less than the maximum sentence of 40

years. His sentences are not excessive individually or collectively.

Errors patent

Thomas received a fine of $5,000 for his felon in possession of a

firearm conviction. La. C. Cr. P. art. 875.1(C)(1) requires that before

imposing a fine, “the court shall conduct a hearing to determine whether

payment in full of the aggregate amount of all the financial obligations to be

imposed upon the defendant would cause substantial financial hardship to

the defendant or his dependents.” See State v. Shepherd, 56,075 (La. App. 2

Cir. 2/26/25), 408 So. 3d 375. There is nothing in the record showing that

such a hearing was held or that the requirement was waived as provided in

La. C. Cr. P. art. 875.1(C)(2). We remand this matter for the trial court to

comply with La. C. Cr. P. art. 875(C).

8

At sentencing, the trial court imprecisely advised Thomas that he had

two years from the finality of “this judgment” to assert any post-conviction

relief claims. La. C. Cr. P. art. 930.8 states that no application for post-

conviction relief will be considered if filed more than two years after the

judgment of conviction and sentence has become final. Therefore, we

advise Thomas, by way of this opinion, that no application for PCR shall be

considered if it is filed more than two years after the judgment of conviction

and sentence has become final under La. C. Cr. P. arts. 914 or 922. State v.

Kelly, 52,731 (La. App. 2 Cir. 6/26/19), 277 So. 3d 855, writ denied, 19-

01845 (La. 6/3/20), 296 So. 3d 1071.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, we grant the motion to withdraw as counsel

of record, affirm Thomas’s convictions, vacate his fine, affirm his remaining

sentences, and remand this matter to the trial court to comply with the

provisions of La. C. Cr. P. art. 875(C).

9