State v. Mortenson

1

STATE OF LOUISIANA v. CHANSE EVERETT MORTENSON

No. 2022 KA 1047

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, First Circuit

April 26, 2023

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

ON APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF ST. TAMMANY, STATE OF LOUISIANA NUMBER 2486-2020, DIVISION J HONORABLE ELLEN M. CREEL, JUDGE

Warren L. Montgomery District Attorney Matthew Caplan Assistant District Attorney Covington, Louisiana Counsel for Appellee State of Louisiana

Walter R. Woodruff, Jr. Metairie, Louisiana Counsel for Defendant -Appellant Chanse Everett Mortenson

BEFORE: THERIOT, CHUTZ, AND HESTER, JJ.

CHUTZ J.

The defendant, Chanse Everett Mortenson, was charged by bill of information with cruelty to juveniles, a violation of La R.S. 14:93, and pled not guilty. Following a jury trial, he was found guilty of attempted cruelty to juveniles, a violation of La. R.S. 14:27 and La. R.S. 14:93, by unanimous verdict. He was sentenced to four years at hard labor suspended, and three years on probation. The defendant now appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. For the following reasons, we affirm the conviction and sentence.

FACTS

The victim, J.G.,^[1] was born on January 7, 2005. In 2019, he was living with his mother and the defendant in the defendant's house. According to J.G.'s testimony, in May 2019, he was forced to sleep outside for multiple days with no tent, blanket, or mattress as punishment for being disrespectful. He did not bathe or change clothes while outside, and the only food he had was either given to him or thrown on the ground for him by his mother or the defendant. The defendant accused J.G. of being disrespectful and disobedient because J.G.'s eyes "dart[ed] around," when J.G. looked at the defendant. J.G indicated he was told to apologize or leave the house, and although he apologized, he was still forced to leave the house. J.G. testified his punishment was "terrible" and was "all [he] thought about." He was subsequently hospitalized for suicidal ideations and prescribed Lexapro.^[2]

In October 2019, the defendant punished J.G. for fourteen days because he was disrespectful and told his father about the defendant's actions. At the beginning of that punishment J.G. was allowed to sleep on the floor inside, but he was later forced to again sleep outside. On the thirteenth day of the punishment, the defendant forced J.G. to "work the floor" with a rag and a bucket of water. After J.G. completed the work, the defendant made him repeat the task. While J.G. was cleaning the floor, the defendant struck him with an open hand "too many [times] to count," bruising J.G.'s eye and bloodying his nose.^[3] After J.G. reported the incident to his father, he was again forced to sleep outside. During that time, he was not allowed into the house to use the bathroom and instead urinated in the woods and defecated at school.

On October 30, 2019, St. Tammany Parish Sheriffs Office Detective Angelica Lopez visited J.G. at the defendant's house. Detective Lopez and child protective investigators spent approximately three hours outside the residence, waiting for J.G.'s mother to return from work. Although it was cold and raining, J.G., who was fourteen years old, was also outside wearing shorts. J.G. had no protection from the mosquitos and was actively scratching mosquito bites on his legs. The defendant repeatedly told J.G. he could only go inside if he apologized for his actions. J.G. remained outside throughout the time authorities were present and even after his mother returned. Later that night, authorities removed J.G. from the home.

Alice Broussard, a guidance counselor at Covington High school, first counseled J.G. at the end of September 2019. He was fourteen years old at the time and was upset because of his relationship with his mother and her boyfriend. J.G. told Broussard that his mother and the defendant removed his bed and everything else from his bedroom except for a pillow and a blanket. In October 2019, J.G. reported conditions had worsened, stating that the defendant had hit him four times and made his nose bleed. Broussard saw bruises under J.G.'s left eye. J.G. also told Broussard he was being forced to sleep outside and that the only method of bathing available to him was to use the garden hose. He stated his mother had made the car available for him to sleep in, but he was not allowed to sleep in the house. He also told Broussard that he was given different food than everyone else and was not allowed to eat dinner with the family.

Dr. Neha Mehta examined J.G. on November 12, 2019. She diagnosed child physical abuse on the basis of J.G. reporting that he was hit in the head, and the blow caused a nosebleed and left a mark. Dr. Mehta also diagnosed child neglect on the basis of J.G. being denied available resources, including food, shelter, heat, sleeping conditions, and basic hygiene to J.G. Dr. Mehta noted J.G. reported punching himself in the head and wanting to kill himself after spending two days sleeping on the grass with bugs and ants and without food or water. Additionally, Dr. Mehta diagnosed emotional abuse on the basis of isolation, spuming, and lack of self-worth as a result of feeling unwanted. In Dr. Mehta's opinion, striking a child in the head was unreasonable discipline because of the risk of significant injury to the child's eyes, teeth, and brain.

The defendant testified that J.G. was not his biological child, his stepchild, or his adopted child, but that he was dating J.G.'s mother. When asked about J.G.'s disobedience or disrespect requiring discipline, the defendant stated J.G. did not speak to his mother very nicely and frequently remained silent. The defendant also claimed J.G. would do his chores "halfway and not all the way." According to the defendant, he and J.G.'s mother disciplined J.G. by taking away his cell phone, TV privileges, movie theater privileges, and pool privileges. The defendant stated, "pretty soon, [J.G.] had everything taken away from him, including his toothbrush and his bed."

According to the defendant, the incident in May occurred after J.G. cussed at his mother and she decided he could stay outside in a chair on the screened -in porch. The defendant claimed J.G. spent only one night on the porch and was provided with a blanket and a towel to use as a pillow. The defendant denied making J.G. sleep on the grass. He also claimed J.G. was given chips, sandwiches, and bottled water. According to the defendant, J.G. kicked the screen porch door and punched the window, but pulled his punches "because he didn't want to get cut." The defendant did not deny that J.G. was taken to the hospital the next day when he said he was going to hurt himself.

In regard to corporal punishment, the defendant stated he had slapped J.G. on two occasions. The first occasion was when J.G. "stepp[ed] forward" toward his mother. The second occasion was when J.G. "stepp[ed] forward" toward the defendant. In regard to this incident, the defendant claimed he warned J.G. several times and backed up twice before slapping him. The defendant stated on another occasion J.G. "chested up" to him in the middle of the driveway. The defendant claimed J.G. swung at him, and he moved his head out of the way before taking J.G. down to the ground without hitting him or slapping him. According to the defendant, J.G. was the aggressor in the incidents and his "chest was puffed up and his fists were doubled." However, the defendant admitted that when he saw J.G. was angry, he told the fourteen-year-old boy: "You want to hit me, don't you[?] ... "Well you go right ahead. See how that works out for you." The defendant denied acting with any intention to be cruel or to mistreat J.G.

In regard to the October incident, the defendant claimed J.G. falsely reported to his father that the defendant had hit him four or five times and bloodied his nose. The defendant denied striking J.G. during the incident, stating instead that his finger accidentally went into J.G.'s nose while he was trying to draw J.G.'s attention to the parts of the floor he had missed while cleaning. The defendant stated he told J.G. either to tell the truth and apologize for getting his mother yelled at and threatened by his father, or to leave the house. The defendant stated that J.G. walked to the unscreened front porch and remained there for approximately three hours. The defendant claimed J.G. then repeatedly refused his mother's offers to come back inside, and she eventually gave him a blanket and a pillow and opened the car for him.

SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE

In his sole assignment of error, the defendant argues the State failed to adduce evidence sufficient to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that he intentionally committed the offense of attempted cruelty to juveniles. He argues the record is devoid of any evidence that his completed actions caused the victim any unjustifiable pain or suffering and, without sufficient evidence of this essential and necessary element his conviction cannot stand.

A conviction based on insufficient evidence cannot stand, as it violates due process. See U.S. Const, amend. XIV La. Const, art. I, § 2. In reviewing claims challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, an appellate court must determine whether any rational trier-of-fact could have found the essential elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt based on the entirety of the evidence, both admissible and inadmissible, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution. See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Oliphant, 2013-2973 (La. 2/21/14), 133 So.3d 1255, 1258-59 (per curiam); see also La. Code Crim. P. art. 821(B); State v. Mussall...