State Of Louisiana VS Nakai Roman Butler
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT 2013 KA 0142 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS NAKAI ROMAN BUTLER DATE OF JUDGMENT NOV 01 2013 O APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY JiJDICIAL DISTRICT COURT SECOND NUMBER 11 CR8 114051 DIVISION G PARISH OF WASHINGTON STATE OF LOUISIANA HONORABLE WILLIAM J CRAIN JUDGE Walter P Reed District Attorney Lewis Murray Asst District Attorney Counsel for Appellee State of Louisiana Covington Louisiana Kathryn Landry Special Appeals Counsel Baton Rouge Louisiana Lieu T Vo Clark Counsel for Defendant Appellant Mandeville Louisiana Nakai R Butler BEFORE KUHN HIGGINBOTHAM AND T HERIOT JJ Disposition CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFTIRMED KLTHN J The defendant Nakai Butler was charged by bill of information with attempted second degree murder a violation ofLa R 14 and 1430 He pled S 27 1 not guilty and following a jury trial was found guilty of the responsive offense of attempted manslaughter a violation of La R 1427 and 1431 He was sentenced S to eighteen years imprisonment at hard labor The defendant filed a motion to reconsider sentence which was denied The defendant now appeals designating two assignments of error challenging the sentence imposed For the following reasons we affirm the conviction and sentence FACTS On June 2 2011 a group ofpeople had gathered at Tiffany Andersods house in Bogalusa Louisiana While several people were shooting dice in the kitchen the defendant and Anthony Smith who were friends sat in the living room When the defendant walked toward the kitchen Anthony struck the defendant and they began fist fighring Several witnesses testified that they saw the fight but they had no expianation for what caused the initial conflict Robert Peters Tiffany sboyfriend broke up the fight and walked Anthony outside to the street At the same time the defendant and Conterrio Johnson walked to their vehicle which was parked in front of the house Anthony told Robert he needed to get his book bag and began walking back toward the house As the defendant was entering the vehicle preparing to leave Anthony walked toward him When Anthony was within several feet of the defendant they exchanged words The defendant then pulled a revolver from his waistband and shot at Anthony who was unarmed striking him in the neck Anthony stumbled about briefly and collapsed while the defendant fled on foot The defendant was anested approximately two weeks later the weapon used in the shooting was never recovered Although Anthony survived the shooting his sister 2 testified at trial that he is confined to a wheelchair and is unable to respond to questions ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR NUMBERS ONE AND TWO In these related assignments of error the defendant argues respectively that I the trial sentence court erred in imposed is denying his motion to reconsider unconstitutionally excessive sentence and that the Specifically the defendant contends his eighteen sentence as a first offender is excessive year The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I 20 of the Louisiana Constitution prohibit the imposition of cruel or excessive punishment Although a sentence falls within statutory limits it may be excessive State v Sepulvado 367 So 762 767 La 1979 A sentence is considered 2d constitutionally excessive if it is grossly disproportionate to the seriousness of the offense or is nothing more than a purposeless and needless infliction of pain and suffering A sentence is considered grossiy disproportionate if when the crime and punishment are considered in light of the harm done to society it shocks the sense of justice State v Andrews 94 La App lst Cir 5 655 So 448 454 0842 95 2d The trial court has great discretion in imposing a sentence within the statutory limits and such a sentence will not be set aside as excessive in the absence of a manifest abuse of discretion See State v Holts 525 So 1241 1245 La App lst Cir 2d 1988 Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure article 894 sets forth the factors for 1 the trial court to consider when imposing sentence While the entire checklist of La P Cr C art 894 need not be recited the record must reflect the trial court 1 adequately considered the criteria State v Brown 02 La App 1 st Cir 2231 03 9 5 849 So 566 569 2d The articulation ofthe factual basis for a sentence is the goal ofLa C art P Cr 1 894 not rigid or mechanical compliance with its provisions Where the record clearly shows an adequate factual basis for the sentence imposed remand is 3 unnecessary even where there has not been full compliance with La C art P Cr 1 894 State v Lanclos 419 o 475 478 La 1982 The trial court should 2d review the defendant spersonal history his prior criminal record the seriousness of the offense the likelihood that he will commit another crime and his potential for rehabilitation through conectional services other than confinement See State x Jones 398 So 1049 1051 La 1981 On appellate review of a sentence the 2d 52 relevant question is whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate State u Thomas 98 1144 La 10 719 So 49 50 per curiam 98 9 2d In the instant matter the defendant was exposed to a maximum sentence of twenty years imprisonment See La R S 3 D 27 14 B 1431 He received a sentence of eighteen years at hard labor On appeal he argues that given his youth two twenty years old on the date of the offense and the absence of any criminal history his sentence is excessive particularly considering that the victim instigated the fight It is clear from its reasons for sentence that the trial court tharoughly considered La C art 894 including any mitigating factors in arriving at an P Cr 1 appropriate sentence The trial court stated in pertinent part The victim in this case was shot by NIr Butler at point blank range in the neck and remains paralyzed from the neck down unable to communicate unable to independently perform any functions to this date and just by outward appearances in all likelihood for the remainder of his natural life I have received a presentencing investigation report in which it is recommended that N1r Butler receive the maYimum sentence which in this case would be twenty years on the attempted manslaughter conviction I have considered the factors under Article 894 I would note 1 the aggravating factors are the fact that this was a crime of violence the fact that a firearm was used the offense resulted in significant permanent injury to the victim all ofthose are aggravating factors 4 I have also considered the mitigating factors in this case the most significant of which is Mr BuUer sage which I believe now to be right at twenty twenty years old two three I also note that prior to this instance Mr Butler does not have a criminal record Mr Butler you maimed someone in a senseless act of violence In addition to that there is a part of the evidence that was introduced that sticks with me And that was testimony by one of the ladies in the case about the ride that was taken in a vehicle at a point in time prior to the shooting during which you exposed a pistol or a weapon in the vehicle for no reason other than to just show a weapon m I also impressed by the fact that there were several guns that were brought to this I think dice game that day And the number of guns and the violence that going ori right now in our community is absolutely s unacceptable Based on all of those factors both aggravating and mitigating it is my opinion that incarceration is necessary I do not believe that any type of confinement outside of a prison system would be appropriate for the nature of the crime Considering the trial court review of the circumstances the nature of the s crime and the lifelong debilitated condition of the victim Anthony Smith we find no abuse of discretion by the trial court Accordingly the sentence imposed by the trial court is not grossly disproportionate to the severity of the offense and therefore is not unconstitutionally excessive The trial court did not en in denying the s defendant motion to reconsider sentence These assignments of error lack merit CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED 5
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.
