STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS MCKARTNEY YOUNG
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 17-1107 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS MCKARTNEY YOUNG ************ APPEAL FROM THE FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF CALCASIEU, NO. 18591-14 HONORABLE CLAYTON DAVIS, DISTRICT JUDGE ************ SYLVIA R. COOKS JUDGE ************ Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, Elizabeth A. Pickett, and Billy H. Ezell, Judges. APPEAL DISMISSED. RECORD MADE AN EXHIBIT TO DOCKET NUMBER 17-1108. John Foster DeRosier District Attorney - 14th JDC Brett Gaspard Assistant District Attorney P. O. Box 3206 Lake Charles, LA 70602-3206 (337) 437-3400 Elizabeth Brooks Hollins Assistant District Attorney 901 Lakeshore Drive, Ste. 800 Lake Charles, LA 70601 (337) 437-3400 Carla Sue Sigler Assistant District Attorney 901 Lakeshore Drive, Ste. 600 Lake Charles, LA 70601 (337) 437-3400 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: State of Louisiana Todd Samuels Clemons Todd Clemons & Associates 1740 Ryan Street Lake Charles, LA (337) 991-9757 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT: McKartney Young Cooks, Judge. Defendant, McKartney Young, was charged with possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute, a violation of La.R.S. 40:967(A)(1), and possession of codeine with the intent to distribute, a violation of La.R.S. 40:970(A)(1), on July 17, 2014, under the trial court’s docket number 18591-14. Defendant originally pled not guilty, but he changed his plea to guilty as charged. At the plea hearing, the State indicated its intent to file a habitual offender bill and did so under the trial court docket number 6713-15. The trial court sentenced Defendant to five years at hard labor on each count to run concurrently with each other and concurrently with an existing probation violation. On September 11, 2015, the trial court adjudicated Defendant a fourth felony offender, vacated the earlier sentence, and sentenced him to twenty years at hard labor. Defendant filed a motion for new trial and to reconsider the habitual offender sentence. At a hearing on December 2, 2015, the trial judge granted Defendant’s motion and vacated the twenty-year sentence. Although the record of a May 24, 2017 hearing does not clearly indicate the trial judge adjudicated Defendant a third felony offender, minutes and the transcript of a September 12, 2017 hearing indicate the parties considered that adjudication to have been made. At that September 12, 2017 hearing, the trial judge sentenced Defendant to five years at hard labor, to run concurrently with any prior sentences, with credit for time served. The State objected and gave notice of its intent to appeal the allegedly illegally lenient sentence. The motion and order for appeal referenced only the trial court’s docket number 6713-15, the habitual offender matter. However, this court assigned its docket number 17-1107 to an appeal of the underlying conviction and its docket number 17-1108 to an appeal of the habitual offender matter. On January 22, 2018, this court consolidated the two matters for briefing purposes only on the State’s motion, which referenced both trial court docket numbers, 18591-14 and 6713-15. On January 30, 2018, this court ordered the State to show cause why the appeal of this court’s docket number 17-1107 should not be dismissed. In response, on February 15, 2018, the State filed a motion asking this court to attach the record of docket number 17-1107 as an exhibit to docket number 17-1108. The State’s motion for appeal indicates it seeks review of the trial court’s allegedly illegally lenient sentence, which involves only the habitual offender matter docketed as 17-1108. Both records are necessary to consider the State’s appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss this court’s docket number 17-1107 and order its record to be attached as an exhibit to this court’s docket number 17-1108. APPEAL DISMISSED. RECORD ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO DOCKET NUMBER 17-1108. 2
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.
