DA to appeal deacon killer ruling

A Louisiana appeals court’s decision that a man convicted of murdering a Houma deacon must receive a new trial will be challenged by Terrebonne prosecutors.

Last week, the Louisiana 1st Circuit Court of Appeal ruled that State District Court Judge David Arceneaux erred by allowing prosecutors to present testimony related to other crimes that unfairly prejudiced the jury against the defendant, Leron Calloway.

Calloway was convicted of murder in connection with the 2013 shooting death of Connely Duplantis, a deacon at Annunziata Catholic Church, while robbing him of a mobile phone.

State District Judge David Arceneaux sentenced Calloway to life in prison after a 2015 trial. Defense lawyers balked at several of the judge’s rulings during the trial, and the 1st Circuit on appeal dismissed most of their arguments. On the matter of the unconnected robberies, which prosecutors used to present a pattern of bad behavior, two members of the appeals court’s three-judge panel said they had gone beyond the limits of fairness.

Judge Jewel Welch wrote the opinion for the majority; Judge Ray Chutz filed a dissenting opinion.

Terrebonne Parish Assistant District Attorney Ellen Doskey, who argued against the appeal on behalf of District Attorney Joe Waitz Jr., said she consulted with the victim’s family and that she will fight the decision.

“We respectfully disagree with the Court of Appeals opinion,” Doskey said. “We believe it was proper for Judge Arceneaux to allow that evidence. We will be seeking review from the Louisiana Supreme Court. The two armed robberies presented in evidence were similar in nature showing his intention and his scheme.”

Jason Dagate, now Waitz’s first assistant district attorney, handled the peoples’ case at trial. Carolyn McNabb was the trial attorney for Calloway, who was 17-years-old when he was arrested on the murder charge.

“I had known this child since he was 14 and living on the street,” McNabb said. “I represented him in juvenile court. He came from an extremely unfortunate background and was desperately in need of rescue. But I never believed he was the shooter that day, and there was no direct evidence tying him to the crime. The appeal court thinks that some of the circumstantial evidence should not have been presented to the jury as I argued in a pretrial motion. It was my duty to help him get a fair trial. I have the utmost faith in our judicial system and can accept however this ends for him at the end of the appeal process. I learned some startling information from representing Leron. Gang activity begins around the age of 11 when children have had no home life. They bond together with other kids living in the street to have something to belong to and survive. Thanks to all the organizations and agencies out there who are trying to address this problem.”

The killing of Duplantis drew wide attention in Houma and adjoining communities.

According to the trial record, the 66-year-old deacon and his wife Yvonne were visiting his parents at 222 Carolyn Ave. in Houma, for the Thanksgiving holidays.

At around 1 p.m. as she stood in the threshold of the home’s doorway, Yvonne saw someone running up behind her husband, whom she later described as a young black male with a small to medium build wearing a dark hooded jacket.

The person in the hooded jacket held his right hand up to her husband’s side, where Connely Duplantis had clipped his white iPhone 5. Yvonne Duplantis said she saw the assailant raise a black gun and fire. She did not get a full view of the shooter’s face, she said.

A co-defendant, Randy Wallace, testified at Calloway’s trial that he was present and witnessed the shooting. Calloway, Wallace testified, told him he needed money and wanted to rob someone. Wallace testified that when Calloway saw Duplantis, who was white, he said that “all white people have money” and advanced toward Duplantis. Wallace said that when the shot was fired he ran.

Wallace, a member of the Rider Gang derived from the Village East neighborhood, testified that he knows the defendant “[ f ]rom the streets” and as a member of a gang called Trap Boy Mafia, which originated from the Memory Lane territory in Mechanicville 7 Wall.

Among the allegations of error at the trial the appeals court considered was an argument that a change of venue should have been granted due to pre-trial publicity, which was rejected.

Evidence at the trial of Facebook posts from Calloway’s page were deemed inconclusive by the 1st Circuit so far as a showing of guilt was concerned. At best, the judges said, the posts were circumstantial.

The decision to order a new trial related to the evidence of other robberies that had occurred in the area being presented with the suggestion that Calloway committed them.

Those crimes were robberies of a New China Restaurant delivery driver and a pizza delivery man which occurred on separate occasions; in those cases neither victim could positively identify who had committed the crimes. Statements from witnesses implicated Calloway, but there was never enough evidence to prove that he was involved.

The appeals court had supported actions of Judge Arceneaux in large part, dismissing arguments against them as they had venue change matter.

But by bringing in testimony and evidence related to the prior robberies, the appeals court maintained, prosecutors had crossed a legal line and the judge allowed them to by not barring the testimony and evidence from the trial.

The panel acknowledged that testimony regarding prior bad acts of a defendant have their place in the justice system with certain controls. But in this case, the judges ruled, “evidence of the extraneous robberies was impermissibly introduced to attack the character of the accused.”

A jury could have concluded, the judges said, that the defendant had a propensity toward criminal behavior, without enough evidence to legally substantiate such a conclusion. While in many cases, the majority opinion states, such an error by a judge can be considered as harmless, and so not evincing a need for reversal, in this case the matter may well have had an effect on the outcome.

Calloway, prosecutors said, will remain incarcerated as the appeal to the Supreme Court is prepared and, if accepted, presented. •

Leron Calloway