STATE v. JENKINS (2024)

Writ granted. We find the videos at issue here to be of such a graphic nature that the danger of unfair prejudice substantially outweighs their slight probative value. See La.C.E. arts. 404(B), 403. Furthermore, the videos are not needed to complete the State's narrative of its case. See generally State v. Taylor, 01-1638, pp. 12-13 (La. 1/14/03), 838 So.2d 729, 743 (rule of “narrative completeness” permits the use of evidence “to tell a story of guiltiness [and] to support an inference of guilt, to convince the jurors a guilty verdict would be morally reasonable as much as to point to the discrete elements of a defendant's legal fault.” (citing Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172, 188, 117 S.Ct. 644, 654, 136 L.Ed.2d 574 (1997)). We therefore find the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the videos. Accordingly, we reverse the rulings of the courts below, and we grant defendant's motion to suppress the videos in their entirety. The matter is remanded for further proceedings.

REVERSED AND REMANDED

PER CURIAM: