State Of Louisiana VS Donald Williams

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2007 KA 0456 f STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS DONALD WILLIAMS Judgment Rendered September On 14 2007 Appeal from the 22nd Judicial District Court In and For the Parish of Washington Trial Court No 98 CR2 74203 Div Honorable Peter J Garcia D Judge Presiding Walter P Reed Counsel for District State of Louisiana Attorney Covington LA Appellee and Kathryn Landry Special Appeals Counsel Baton Rouge LA Prentice L White Counsel for Defendant Louisiana Donald Williams Baton Appellate Proj ect Rouge LA BEFORE Appellant WHIPPLE GUIDRY AND HUGHES JJ HUGHES J The defendant indictment with and 14 27 convicted for the He as Williams attempted aggravated pled guilty not Prior to charged of appointment mental condition to Donald a filed was sentenced to a new jury sanity commission appointed to at hard two parole or to moved and Dr Salcedo by the doctors proceed The defendant denied The defendant court labor for suspension years without the thirty of sentence The defendant now assigmnents of error as follows error when it proceed with the trial in the defendant s though it knew that the jury would assume absence The district decided even was determine the defendant s the reports filed reviewing 14 42 trial the defendant Thompson Dr trial which the trial imprisonment benefit of probation 1 a found the defendant competent comi appeals urging violation of LSA R S sentencing counsel for the defendant The trial court motion for a a rape Following examine the defendant After the trial charged by grand jury was cOlmnitted manifest court to defendant not was avoid The district court because he was the trying to punishment 2 present in that the comi committed reversible error in accepting jury guilty clearly victim was a habitual liar who made multiple false alleged statements to the police regarding the identity of the individual who attempted to rape her over seven years ago s verdict because the record indicates that the Finding no merit in the assigned errors we affirm the defendant s conviction and sentence FACTS In received had been was 1 1998 a Washington Parish Sheriffs Detective Lorenzo Raiford repOli from Wilma Hartfield indicating that her daughter C C sexually abused subsequently assigned Detective David Pittman to investigate In accordance with LSA R S 46 1 844 W the a complaint juvenile detective Detective Pittman the victim herein is referenced 2 l only by her initials sought the assistance of Monica Jordan of Child Protection in connection with the Children s interviewer Julia Bogalusa Louisiana Center rubbed her one night vaginal area where with his and fingers thing to his the interview C C also disclosed that Kevin Blackwell taken into state At trial custody over had and was C C that the defendant rubbed her of the abuse to kill C Later allegation of sexual abuse by Throughout that her during cross Jerry CC testimony however Kevin Blackwell occurred when she was abused her C C was 3 night past C C was one was arrested was by the defendant when this top of her explained i t didn t go in family stated on She examination She During Jerry and if she ever told regarding her was not repeatedly stated that her tlue five years old and the instant defendant same penis but C and her by forensic sixteen year old C C repOli his the claimed that the of her buttocks cheeks rectum with The defendant then threatened that upon her to in her buttocks that the defendant got explained the C C subsequently six years after the initial nine years old penis abused her in the sexually taken family friend a individual named an and the defendant placed his penis between anyone 1998 in 1998 videotaped his placed daughter again described the sexual abuse inflicted she was stated that the defendant C C same was Depmiment 10 August interviewed was when she visited his home in defendant also did the named she The entire interview Maloney In the interview On the nine year old child investigation Advocacy social worker with the a true claim explained that this abuse separate from the abuse by ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER ONE ABSENCE OF DEFENDANT DURING TRIAL PROCEEDINGS In his first of assigmnent violated his constitutional the defendant contends the trial enol in rights court his trial outside of his conducting presence The record before when the trial reflects that the defendant us After the selection of the began presentation of evidence the trial of evidence of admissibility held court physically present to the jury but prior to detennine the hearing a defendant by the acts prior was against other children The defendant adult s Angela Loving testified how the defendant She sex at this and C T hearing In her upon her probation officer repeatedly sexually abused her from approximately s his every other prior guilty plea indecent behavior with a CT testimony explained that the defendant performed vaginal the defendant to daughter day a described very young age intercourse and Loving testified oral regarding 21 st Judicial District Court docket juvenile or 66296 L A M At the conclusion of this testimonial evidence the trial comi went into recess before issuing the defendant was ruling a not that he did not defendant present voluntarily not a present and 3 The defendant reconvened after the s absented himself proceeded recess attorney notified the after comi Upon finding that the the trial without the defendant had already The defendant present throughout the remainder of the trial As A comi know the whereabouts of his client commenced the trial court was When the general rule must through 6 a defendant be present at every of LSA C Cr P charged with a felony has a right to be important stage of the trial Paragraphs mi 831 4 provide that a defendant charged with felony a shall be present impanelling and trial determining is court trials at all at jury ruling As adduced being However absolute and calling on the the for the 832 A 1 of trial shall art a not 831 and he trial voluntarily LSA C CrP 761 art if the right prevent the further If defendant a requirements of LSA C Cr P Bolton 408 So 2d 250 257 58 La App 2 20 04 2 Cir 9 26 01 La A 831 mis 1981 State 796 So 2d 94 98 be jury his voluntarily absents himself but and v to satisfy 832 See Landrum writ denied the due State v 35 053 p 5 2003 0493 La 866 So 2d 823 Our review of the record reveals that the defendant commencement of the trial himself from the case to is called for examination attorney is present the attorney s presence is sufficient process right counsel has been waived to prospective juror not are absents himself after the trial has cOlrunenced when the first cOlrunences or or defendant who is progress of the trial and shall be considered to have waived his present if his counsel is present jury in bench trials at all times LSA C Cr P mi commencement of evidence in the rendition of the verdict at C Cr P challenging the trial when the during admissibility provisions of provided in LSA initially present and examination all times proceedings when the jury is present when evidence is judgment of the swearing the at s trial which he knew already voluntary absence Contrary to nothing in the record before us in any way involuntary On condition rendered his absence to absent Under the facts and circumstances of this unexplained was present for the Thereafter the defendant chose proceedings the defendant was failure to return to in progress can the on s absence was the defendant contends his mental involuntary 5 as a appeal there is indicate that the defendant appeal for his only be considered the defendant s assertions to comiroom However as the state correctly points out no reason was ever trial court Thus constitutional right to be present s attOlney defendant s constitutional no the defendant such rights Furthermore courtroom throughout violated not were Insofar requirements as hearing s absence was ever we and the note in this requested we his counsel s the note the trial his The presence the defendant claims the as should have allowed defense counsel court absence in the s the trial during present in the was satisfies the due process explain for the defendant by voluntarily absenting himself the defendant waived defendant trial provided to conduct a state correctly points This assignment of case to hearing out error lacks merit ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER TWO SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE In his second sufficiency of the habitual liar state and her defendant claims the abuse of C C is act that she In assigmnent of at reviewing identity claims Virginia 443 U S after IS 319 two other men a The 1998 sexual of the same the defendant the sufficiency viewing the of the evidence evidence in the light this most any rational trier of fact could have found the of the crime 307 C C asselis alleged perpetrator of the challenging prosecution essential elements of the alleging against comi must consider whether favorable to the challenges the testimony should have been discredited issue because C C accused was now he Specifically evidence s the defendant error beyond a 99 S Ct 2781 See also LSA C CrP art 821 B State v reasonable doubt 2789 Jackson 61 L Ed 2d 560 Mussall 523 So 2d 1305 v 1979 1308 9 La 1988 As previously aggravated discussed the defendant rape of then nine year old C C 6 was convicted of The crime of attempted aggravated rape is defined in LSA R S La Acts No 301 14 42 which provided prior 1 and 2003 La Acts No 795 9 to 1 9 amendment in pmi by 2001 follows as A Aggravated rape is a rape committed where the anal or vaginal sexual intercourse is deemed to be without lawful consent of the more of the victim because it is committed under anyone following circumstances 4 When the victim is under the age of twelve years of the victim s age shall not be a defense knowledge Rape is the act of anal vaginal or and any sexual not necessary sufficient to amendment by 2001 La Acts specific intent to commit tending directly attempt penetration vaginal complete the crime a 301 crime does toward the to commit LSA R S No Lack of sexual intercourse with female person committed without the person s lawful 1 9 or or slight is prior B person who act of his and male Emission is consent 14 41 A an a anal however Any omits accomplishing or or to having a for the purpose of and object is guilty of an the offense intended and it shall be immaterial whether under the circumstances he would have actually accomplished his purpose LSA C CrP art 14 27 A Specific intent is defined as that state of mind circumstances indicate that the offender criminal consequences 14 1 1 0 Specific intent statements such as a Crawford La by a defendant defendant of fact is 1032 to to s actions determine the 619 So 2d 828 follow his be may or or by actively desired the prescribed act or failure to LSA R S act proved by direct evidence such as inference from circumstantial evidence facts depicting the circumstances requisite intent 831 which exists when the La App 1993 7 in a 1 Cir criminal case writ denied The trier State 625 v So 2d At the trial of this matter Wilma Hartfield testified that the defendant family was a C C to friend the spend Ms Hartfield night at explained that the defendant known the defendant for years and his once house s she allowed in 1998 She she had explained C C daughter wanted to spend the night C C defendant played for an previous s the jury Particularly untrue by off her pulled C C rectum had s C C or CT with her when she C T C T areas on There C C No were no thing in four or five fourteen or C was nine years Palazzo Dr me were DT every other noted to she was defendant s behalf in the instant case that she afraid testify on his behalf 8 was a sex on day and continued never told anyone However when her to she decided she had to grandmother that the defendant oral C T claimed the defendant explained C T performed grandmother Vivian Williams continuously harassed her not Kevin signs of sexual abuse The defendant also fifteen years old about the sexual abuse because would being molested signs of trauma clinical were daughter testified that the defendant molested her sexually abused her sister told her interview was five years old pediatrician testified that C Donald put his Center explained the defendant began having sexual intercourse was at was the into her penis however that when she explained that the abuse took place until she left home also a remember not house s Advocacy s She maintained Jerry examination rectal to insert his portions of the stated that she did nurse the defendant s of her life some inappropriately touched her physical vaginal C T most a attempted C C testified that old when she told his performed and interview with the Children Anthony Palazzo Dr C C panties individual named Blackwell that while at the defendant consistently testified testify speak up on the CT child molester and that she C T denied any personal knowledge of the defendant molesting C C T did not bringing the child home because they specifically are recall C C CT upset that she would she remembered spending the night but testified that she is C estranged from her family testify for the defendant not Vivian Williams who is also the defendant s mother testified for the defense She testified that C T sexually abused her to fabricate the her On Ms Williams allegations LA M Initially sufficient 467 469 to of abuse indecent behavior with we note that the 1 Cir 1987 App resolution of which State v of fact matter jury is one was Notwithstanding falsely accusing a possibly motivated out of anger towards were inflicted accept v of the victim alone if believed is State v Orgeron 519 So 2d 113 of the evidence La or App same by his home its 1 Cir 1984 1988 matters the of the sufficiency As the trier or in pmi the the defendant that the victim based acts on unequivocally C C never by the defendant and 9 her falsely alleged propensity for of sexual misconduct the record candidly admitted C La credibility not reject in whole 512 So 2d Richardson 459 So 2d at 38 credibility untrue C at The victim in that juvenile determination of the weight any assertion others of the sexually abused her the abuse to State reflects that while she very a writ denied upon of the free accused him and lacked statement was granddaughters offense an Richardson 459 So 2d 31 38 the that the defendant conflicting testimony about factual depends testimony of any witness prior testimony elements of Fmihermore where there is witness the C T against the defendant another of Ms Williams to prove the La explained that to her examination Ms Williams admitted that the defendant had cross previously pled guilty case was indicated never that some portions testified that the defendant wavered in her or of her her description of identification of the defendant defendant of this the as s perpetrator of the sexual abuse in 1998 assertions C C did particular abuse indicates that fabricated separate accuse The fact that the C C despite not Contrary to the anyone other than the defendant defendant jury found the guilty troubled past and her admission that she s of allegations previous abuse by Jeny the jury accepted the victim s testimony regarding the defendant s actions against her and rejected The the defendant credibility the evidence witnesses of guilt or On 546 So 2d 169 v claim that he did of the witness this appeal reweigh State s not s will not the evidence to overturn Creel 540 So 2d 511 La 1989 This is testimony court 514 assignment commit the offense a La of a matter of the assess the fact finder App error weight credibility of of determination s 1 Cir writ denied lacks merit CONCLUSION After light most a thorough review of the favorable to fact could have found every reasonable the state beyond hypothesis a record we are viewing the evidence in the convinced that any rational trier of reasonable doubt and of innocence to the exclusion of that defendant was guilty attempted aggravated rape Accordingly the defendant s conviction and sentence CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED 10 are affirmed of

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.