State of Louisiana v. Jamal James Carmouche

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: April 3, 2013
• Docket: KA-0012-1099
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

12-1099

VERSUS

JAMAL JAMES CARMOUCHE

**********

APPEAL FROM THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF LAFAYETTE, NO. CR 136308 HONORABLE MARILYN C. CASTLE, DISTRICT JUDGE

JAMES T. GENOVESE JUDGE

Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, James T. Genovese, and John E. Conery, Judges.

AFFIRMED.

Edward K. Bauman Louisiana Appellate Project Post Office Box 1641 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70602 (337) 491-0570 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT: Jamal James Carmouche

Michael Harson District Attorney—Fifteenth Judicial District Pat Magee, Assistant District Attorney Post Office Box 3306 Lafayette, Louisiana 70502 (337) 232-5170 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: State of Louisiana GENOVESE, Judge.

In this criminal case, Defendant, Jamal James Carmouche, appeals his

habitual offender adjudication and sentence. For the following reasons, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

A review of the evidence in the record indicates that on September 18, 2010,

Marcus Despanie was shot and killed. On January 12, 2011, Defendant was

indicted for the second degree murder of Mr. Despanie. Following a trial by jury,

Defendant was found guilty of the responsive verdict of manslaughter and

sentenced to thirty-five years at hard labor with credit for time served. That

conviction and sentence is the subject of a separate appeal.

At the conclusion of the sentencing for his manslaughter conviction, the

State charged Defendant as a habitual offender. Following a habitual offender

hearing, Defendant was adjudicated a fourth felony offender. His previous

thirty-five-year manslaughter sentence was vacated, and he was resentenced to

forty years at hard labor. Defendant is now before this court, appealing his

habitual offender adjudication and sentence; however, he did not assign any errors

for review.

ERRORS PATENT

In accordance with La.Code Crim.P. art. 920, all appeals are reviewed for

errors patent on the face of the record. After reviewing the record, we find no

errors patent.

ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

Critical to this appeal, Defendant did not assign any errors with regard to his

habitual offender adjudication and sentence. Consequently, there are no errors or

anything before this court for review. DISPOSITION

Defendant’s habitual offender adjudication and sentence are affirmed.