STATE v. WILLIAMS (2020)

Writ application granted. See per curiam.

On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans Criminal

Writ granted. The district court did not err in admitting testimony as to the victim's telephone call to his daughter of the victim's fearful state of mind and present sense impression of the altercation. See State v. Magee, 11-0574, p. 48 (La. 9/28/12), 103 So. 3d 285, 319. As to the hearsay testimony of the victim's statement that he had called 911 and thought that defendant and Mr. Williams were going to kill him, this testimony was not contemporaneously objected to, and thus the issue was not preserved for appeal. See La.C.Cr.P. art. 841. The ruling of the court of appeal, which vacated the conviction and pretermitted all remaining assignments of error, is reversed.

However, the present matter was pending on direct review when Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ––––, 140 S.Ct. 1390, 206 L.Ed.2d 583 (2020), was decided, and therefore the holding of Ramos applies. See Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314, 328, 107 S.Ct. 708, 716, 93 L.Ed.2d 649 (1987). The matter is remanded to the court of appeal for further proceedings and to conduct a new error patent review in light of Ramos v. Louisiana. If the non-unanimous jury claim was not preserved for review in the trial court or was abandoned during any stage of the proceedings, the court of appeal should nonetheless consider the issue as part of its error patent review. See La.C.Cr.P. art. 920(2).