Opinion
2022 KW 0484
08-17-2022
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. MONTRELL LEE
State of Louisiana, applying for supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 08-17-0871.
BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C.J., GUIDRY AND WOLFE, JJ.
WRIT DENIED.
JMG
EW
Whipple, C.J., dissents. The issue in this writ application is whether the trial court abused its discretion in excluding a portion of the recording of a 911 call. On March 13, 2020, the defendant was found guilty of second degree rape. His conviction was subsequently vacated pursuant to Ramos v. Louisiana, ___U.S.___, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 206 L.Ed.2d 583 (2020), and the case is proceeding toward a new trial. The State seeks to introduce a 911 call made by the victim and a friend through a translator (which was admitted in its entirety at the first trial). Concluding that the call was too far removed from the incident due to the delay while trying to find a translator to report the crime, such that the statements did not qualify as excited utterances, the trial court ruled that only a portion of the recording would be admissible at trial, which I conclude was erroneous. Also, it is not clear from the trial court's oral reasons that the court considered whether these statements fall under an exception to the hearsay rule as "present sense impressions" in addition to excited utterances (which the State argues occurred herein immediately after a traumatizing event that was stressful and dangerous). Based on the circumstances presented herein, where the victim required a translator to communicate with the 911 operator, I find the trial court abused its discretion by ruling that only a portion of the 911 call will be admitted. For these reasons, I respectfully dissent and would grant the State's motion in limine.