STATE v. PATTON (2020)

Writ application granted. See per curiam.

Writ granted. We find the trial court abused its discretion in granting the defendant's motion for release of unredacted police reports. Pursuant to the facts presented, we further find the state has met its burden of making a prima facie showing that “the witness's safety may be compromised by the disclosure.” La.

C.Cr.P. art. 729.7. The order of the trial court is reversed, thereby permitting the state to maintain the redactions in the police reports at issue.

The state's burden on this pre-trial issue, a prima facie showing, does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt; rather, it is a showing “[s]ufficient to establish a fact or raise a presumption unless disproved or rebutted; based on what seems to be true on first examination, even though it may later be proved to be untrue.” Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019). Here, the district attorney articulated his concern about retaliation due to the facts and circumstances of the shootout, defendant's history of violent criminal behavior, and the fact that he faces charges for multiple violent crimes, including second degree murder and multiple counts of attempted second degree murder. In my view, in a case of this nature, a witness's safety is a critical factor in the analysis and the showing established here was sufficient for the state to meet its burden under La. C.Cr.P. art. 729.7(A).

Crichton, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.