State of Louisiana v. Quinton Terell Peace

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: August 27, 2025
• Docket: 56,374-KA
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Judgment rendered August 27, 2025. Application for rehearing may be filed within the delay allowed by Art. 922, La. C. Cr. P.

No. 56,374-KA

COURT OF APPEAL SECOND CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA

*****

STATE OF LOUISIANA Appellee

versus

QUINTON TERELL PEACE Appellant

Appealed from the First Judicial District Court for the Parish of Caddo, Louisiana Trial Court No. 386,867

Honorable, Michael A. Pitman, Judge

LOUISIANA APPELLATE PROJECT Counsel for Appellant By: Peggy J. Sullivan

QUINTON TERELL PEACE Pro Se

JAMES E. STEWART, SR. Counsel for Appellee District Attorney

REBECCA ARMAND EDWARDS CHRISTOPHER BOWMAN Assistant District Attorneys

****

Before COX, MARCOTTE, and ELLENDER, JJ. MARCOTTE, J.

This criminal appeal arises from the First Judicial District Court,

Parish of Caddo, the Honorable Michael Pitman presiding. Defendant

Quinton Peace was found guilty of second degree murder and sentenced to

life imprisonment without benefits. He appeals his conviction and sentence.

Defendant’s appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw, along with a

brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396, 18 L.

Ed. 2d 493 (1967), State v. Jyles, 96-2669 (La. 12/12/97), 704 So. 2d 241,

State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La. 4/28/95), 653 So. 2d 1176, and State v.

Benjamin, 573 So. 2d 528 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1990), alleging that the record is

devoid of non-frivolous issues upon which to base the appeal. For the

following reasons, we affirm defendant’s conviction and sentence and grant

appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Quinton Peace was charged by bill of indictment with the second

degree murder of Chavez Parker (“Parker”), in violation of La. R.S. 14:30.1.

The offense occurred on December 21, 2021, and Peace pled not guilty. At

trial, police officers from the Shreveport Police Department (“SPD”)

testified that in the early morning hours of December 21, 2021, they were

riding patrol through the Linwood Homes Apartments in Shreveport,

Louisiana, where defendant lived. They observed a red Chevy Impala

parked in the apartment complex with its trunk and four doors open. There

were two individuals standing beside the car. The pair ran away upon seeing

police but were apprehended a short time later. A dead body was discovered

in the Impala. One of the fleeing suspects, Darius Persley (“Persley”), was caught with bloody socks in his hands; he was arrested. The other

individual, Ashlynn Bergeaux (“Bergeaux”), was taken to the hospital.

Near the Impala, which was registered to Parker, police found a bottle

of rubbing alcohol and bloody paper towels. The car was very dirty, but

there were marks on the vehicle consistent with someone attempting to clean

or wipe it. Officers found 9mm cartridge casings in the seats of the Impala.

In a nearby apartment unit, police found two empty boxes, one for

ammunition for a 9mm handgun, and another for a 9mm SCCY CPX-1

pistol with serial number 936310. After speaking with Bergeaux, police

issued an arrest warrant for Peace, who was later arrested in Fort Worth,

Texas, and was found in possession of a CPX-1 pistol with the same serial

number.

Bergeaux testified that she was with Persley, who was her boyfriend

at the time, and Peace in the early morning of December 21, 2021.

Bergeaux identified defendant in open court. Peace drove them in his white

SUV to a residential area to purchase marijuana. Persley and defendant got

into the red Impala to make the drug sale, and Bergeaux remained in the

SUV. She testified that she heard four gunshots, Persley and defendant ran

back to the SUV, and they drove away. Bergeaux said that Peace and

Persley were talking about leaving fingerprints in the Impala, so Peace drove

the SUV back to the Impala’s location, got into Parker’s car, and sat on

Parker’s lap in the driver’s seat to drive the car to Linwood Homes. Persley

then forced Bergeaux to drive the SUV to the apartment complex by

threatening to shoot her.

A surveillance video of the shooting showed a man exiting a house,

getting into an Impala, reversing into a neighboring driveway, and parking. 2 About 26 minutes later, a white SUV arrived on the scene. Two men exited

the SUV, walked to the Impala, and got in. Ten minutes later, the two males

ran back to the SUV and quickly drove away. Approximately 9-10 minutes

later, the SUV returned, and the driver exited the SUV and got into the

Impala. Both vehicles were then driven away.

At Linwood Homes, Peace joked and laughed about having to sit in

Parker’s lap to drive his car. He and Persley moved Parker’s body to the

passenger seat and made Bergeaux help them to remove any evidence from

the car that might have implicated them in the shooting. Bergeaux stated

that Peace and Persley intended to submerge the Impala in a body of water.

The police interrupted their efforts.

The autopsy of Parker showed that he died from four penetrating

gunshot wounds to his right temple, cheek, neck, and shoulder. A forensic

firearms expert testified that three of the shots recovered from Parker’s body

were fired from the CPX-1 pistol found in Peace’s possession when he was

arrested. The fourth shot was fired from a different CPX-1 pistol.

Peace was interviewed by SPD detective Monique Coleman (“Det.

Coleman”) after his arrest. He told Det. Coleman in his interview that he

shot Parker in the Impala, left the neighborhood, and then returned to get the

car. Peace said that Parker was too heavy to move, so he sat in the victim’s

lap to drive the car to Linwood Homes. Peace stated that he wanted to

remove any evidence from the car that could tie them to the crime and leave

it abandoned. He said he retrieved alcohol, wipes, and other items to clean

the vehicle.

Peace claimed Parker was reaching forward for a gun when he shot

him and that the shooting was a mistake. Det. Coleman testified that Peace’s 3 reenactment of the shooting that he performed during his interview was

implausible given the injuries Parker sustained. Peace said he was

attempting to rob Parker at the time he shot him, and he kept the gun he used

to shoot the victim with him until he was taken into custody. A unanimous

jury found Peace guilty as charged.

Peace filed a motion for a post-verdict judgment of acquittal asserting

that the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed

second degree murder; the trial court denied his motion at his sentencing

hearing. Defendant waived any sentencing delays.

The trial court considered the aggravating and mitigating sentencing

factors in La. C. Cr. P. art. 894.1 and found that: 1) Peace lacked remorse for

shooting Parker; 2) he showed deliberate cruelty in shooting the victim at

near-point-blank range; 3) he used his status as Parker’s friend to lure him

out and rob him; 4) he created a risk of death or great bodily harm to more

than one person by discharging a firearm in a residential neighborhood; 5)

he and Persley threatened to kill Bergeaux if she did not assist them with the

cleanup after the offense occurred; 6) Parker’s relatives testified about the

significant spiritual and emotional loss his death was to their family; and 7)

Peace had one conviction for contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile,

and prior to the instant trial, he attempted to disarm a deputy.

The trial court sentenced Peace to life imprisonment at hard labor

without benefits. The court informed defendant of his post-conviction relief

time constraints. Peace now appeals.

DISCUSSION

Appellate counsel seeks permission to withdraw as counsel and filed a

brief pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, State v. Jyles, supra, State v. 4 Mouton, supra, and State v. Benjamin, supra, arguing there are no non-

frivolous issues upon which to base an appeal. The brief outlines the

procedural history of the case, including Peace’s sentencing history, and

contains a detailed and reviewable assessment for defendant and this court

regarding whether the appeal is worth pursuing. Counsel states that there

exists sufficient evidence for Peace’s conviction and notes that trial counsel

did not file motions to suppress the evidence or defendant’s statement;

therefore, those issues are not preserved for appeal. Counsel declares that

defendant’s motion for a post-verdict judgment of acquittal was submitted

without further argument and was denied by the trial court.

Appellate counsel verified that she mailed copies of the motion to

withdraw and the brief to Peace, in accordance with Anders v. California,

supra, State v. Jyles, supra, and State v. Mouton, supra. We note that while

this appeal was pending, defendant requested a copy of the appellate record

but did not file a pro se brief. The State declined to file a brief.

In Anders v. California, supra, the United States Supreme Court

stated that appointed appellate counsel may request permission to withdraw

if she finds her case to be wholly frivolous after a conscientious examination

of it. The request must be accompanied by a brief referring to anything in

the record that might arguably support the appeal so as to provide the

reviewing court with a basis for determining whether appointed counsel

fully performed her duty to support her client’s appeal to the best of her

ability and to assist the reviewing court in making the critical determination

whether the appeal is indeed so frivolous that counsel should be permitted to

withdraw. McCoy v. Ct. App. Wis., Dist. 1, 486 U.S. 429, 438-39, 108 S. Ct.

1895, 100 L. Ed. 2d 440 (1988), citing Anders v. California, supra. 5 In State v. Jyles, supra, the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that an

Anders brief need not tediously catalog every meritless pretrial motion or

objection made at trial with a detailed explanation of why the motions or

objections lack merit. The court explained that an Anders brief must

demonstrate by full discussion and analysis that appellate counsel “has cast

an advocate’s eye over the trial record and considered whether any ruling

made by the trial court, subject to the contemporaneous objection rule, had a

significant, adverse impact on shaping the evidence presented to the jury for

its consideration.” Id. at p. 2, 704 So. 2d at 241.

Our independent review of the record supports appellate counsel’s

assertion that there are no non-frivolous issues to be raised on appeal. The

bill of indictment correctly charged defendant and plainly and concisely

stated the essential facts constituting the charged offense. The indictment

sufficiently identified defendant and the crime charged. See La. C. Cr. P.

arts. 464-466. The record reflects that defendant appeared at each stage of

the proceedings against him, including his arraignment, trial, and sentencing.

We further find that the jury was properly composed of twelve members and

that it reached a unanimous verdict. Furthermore, defense counsel made

several contemporaneous objections during trial, and those with merit were

sustained by the trial court.

Our review of the record for sufficiency of the evidence establishes

that the evidence presented was sufficient under the standard found in

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S. Ct. 2781, 61 L. Ed. 2d 560 (1979),

to prove the essential statutory elements of second degree murder. See La.

R.S. 14:30.1.

6 The record reveals that Bergeaux identified Peace as one of the people

who entered Parker’s vehicle. She testified that she heard gunshots shortly

thereafter, and Persley and Peace then ran back to Peace’s SUV to flee the

scene. The evidence shows that Peace shot Parker at close range, moved his

Impala to a different location, and attempted to cover up the crime,

threatening Bergeaux in the process. Persley was seen by police, in the

parking lot of Peace’s apartment complex, attempting to clean the Impala,

which contained Parker’s dead body. Upon his arrest, Peace was in

possession of a firearm used to shoot Parker, which he said had been in his

possession up until his arrest. Peace also admitted to shooting Parker in his

police interview. There is no doubt that Peace murdered the victim and his

conviction is sound.

Additionally, Peace’s life sentence without benefits is lawful and not

excessive. The trial court properly considered the aggravating and

mitigating factors found in La. C. Cr. P. art. 894.1. The penalty for second

degree murder is a mandatory life sentence at hard labor without benefits.

La. R.S. 14:30.1(B); See State v. Fredieu, 52,042 (La. App. 2 Cir. 6/27/18),

250 So. 3d 1157, writ denied, 18-1315 (La. 10/29/18), 254 So. 3d 1218.

The record was reviewed for errors patent and none were found.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, defendant’s conviction and sentence are

affirmed. Appellate defense counsel’s motion to withdraw is hereby

granted.

CONVICTION AND SENTENCE AFFIRMED; APPELLATE COUNSEL’S MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED.