Opinion
No. 2023-K-01546
09-04-2024
STATE of Louisiana v. William A. MCDONOUGH
Crichton, J., would grant in part and assigns reasons. Hughes, J., recused. Crichton, J., would grant in part and assigns reasons.
Applying For Writ Of Certiorari, Parish of Orleans Criminal, Criminal District Court Number(s) 546-035, Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Number(s) 2022-KA-0628.
1Writ application denied.
Crichton, J., would grant in part and assigns reasons.
Hughes, J., recused.
Crichton, J., would grant in part and assigns reasons.
1The defendant’s assignments of error as to the trial lack merit; he received an error-free, fair trial. However, I would grant the writ application as to the imposition of the 30-year sentence. Defendant was convicted of second degree rape, a violation of La. R.S. 14:42.1, which leaves the trial judge much discretion in sentencing, providing a broad range from five to 40 years imprisonment at hard labor.
When imposing a sentence, a trial court "shall state for the record the considerations taken into account and the factual basis therefor in imposing sentence." La. C.Cr.P. art. 894.1(C). As I have emphasized before, compliance with La. C.Cr.P. art. 894.1(C) is mandatory. See, e.g., State v. Ervin, 2023-01336, p. 2 (La. 4/9/24), 382 So.3d 816, 817 (writ denied) (Crichton, J., would grant) (urging remand for resentencing in order for trial court to "carefully apply the sentencing guidelines provided in La. C.Cr.P. art. 894.1 and then ‘state for the record the considerations taken into account.’ "); State v. Braden, 2023-01428, p. 1 (La. 4/9/24), 382 So.3d 830 (writ denied) (Crichton, J., additionally concurring) (noting "compliance with La.C.Cr.P. art. 894.1 is, of course, mandatory."); State v. Toney, 2021-01805, p. 1 (La. 1/26/22), 332 So.3d 77 (writ denied) (Crichton, J., concurring in part) (emphasizing "the importance of a recitation of full and comprehensive reasons for the trial court’s" sentence); State v. Elliott, 2019-01360, p. 1 (La. 2/18/20), 289 So.3d 1025 (Crichton, J., additionally concurring) ("As always, the 2trial court should provide detailed reasons for its adjudication and, in full compliance with La. C.Cr.P. art. 894.1, the defendant’s sentence."); State v. Ladd, 2014-1611, p. 1 (La. 3/27/15), 164 So.3d 184 (Crichton, J., additionally concurring) (agreeing with reversal and remand for resentencing due to trial court’s failure to provide reasons for the sentence imposed); State v. DeLaCerda, 2014-1456, p. 1 (La. 3/6/15), 162 So.3d 373 (writ denied) (Crichton, J., would grant) (noting with approval trial court’s compliance with the mandatory requirements of La.C.Cr.P. art. 894.1.).
Here the trial court failed to state what factors she considered before imposing the sentence. Articulating these reasons on the record is necessary for meaningful review. In this case, the 30-year sentence may be warranted, however appellate review of the sentence is hampered absent a recitation of the considerations taken into ac- count before its imposition. For these reasons, I would grant the writ application, in part, and remand the matter to the trial court for resentencing in compliance with La. C.Cr.P. art. 894.1.