State of Louisiana v. Ervin Leanard Walker

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: June 3, 2020
• Docket: KA-0019-0421
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

19-421

VERSUS

ERVIN LEANARD WALKER

************ APPEAL FROM TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF NATCHITOCHES, NO. C25217 HONORABLE LALA BRITTAIN SYLVESTER, DISTRICT JUDGE

************ SYLVIA R. COOKS JUDGE ************

Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, Billy H. Ezell and Jonathan W. Perry, Judges. REVERSED; REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL.

Chad M. Ikerd Louisiana Appellate Project P.O. Box 2125 Lafayette, LA 70502 (225) 806-2936 Attorney for Defendant/Appellant: Ervin Leanard Walker

Amanda McCLung Assistant District Attorney Tenth Judicial District P.O. Box Number 838 Natchitoches, LA 71457 (318) 357-2214 Attorney for Appellee: State of Louisiana COOKS, Judge.

Defendant filed a Motion for a Unanimous Jury on August 3, 2018, on the

basis that La.Code Crim.P. art. 782(A) and La.Const. art. 1, § 17 were

unconstitutional and violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth

Amendment. That motion was denied on August 7, 2018. Defendant was

subsequently tried by a jury of twelve, ten of whom concurred in the verdict.

The United States Supreme Court recently held non-unanimous jury verdicts

unconstitutional. Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ___, ___ S.Ct. ___ (2020). (Slip

Op.). The Supreme Court unambiguously determined that non-unanimous verdicts

are not permissible under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution

and the prohibition applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. (Slip

Op. at p. 26; see also concurrences by Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, and Thomas, JJ.).1

Further, the opinion recognizes, that its ruling applies to cases pending on

direct review. (Slip Op. at 22-23.) Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence states this

explicitly. (Slip Op. at 15-17.) Such review is in keeping with this state’s

jurisprudence. See, State v. Ruiz, 06-1755 (La. 4/11/07), 955 So.2d 81. We therefore

find the Ramos ruling is applicable and it requires Defendant’s conviction by a non-

unanimous jury verdict be reversed. Accordingly, the case must be remanded for a

new trial.

REVERSED; REMANDED FOR A NEW TRIAL.

1 Each concurrence has it own sequence of page numbers.