State v. Freche — Vacated the denial of a requested lesser-offense instruction and ordered reconsideration after trial evidence

Case
State of Louisiana v. Morgan L. Freche
Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit
Judge
McClendon, C.J.; Hester, J.; Miller, J.
Date Decided
October 16, 2026
Docket No.
2026 KW 1292
Topics
Criminal Law; Jury Instructions; Responsive Verdicts; Supervisory Writs
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Morgan L. Freche sought supervisory review of a pretrial ruling by the 21st Judicial District Court in Tangipahoa Parish. The district court had denied Freche’s request for a special jury instruction identifying misdemeanor carnal knowledge as a responsive verdict.

The requested instruction related to the charged offense of felony carnal knowledge of a juvenile. Louisiana Criminal Jury Instructions and Procedures § 10:134 suggests that misdemeanor carnal knowledge is a responsive verdict to that felony offense, and the appellate court also referenced La. R.S. 14:80, La. R.S. 14:80.1, and La. Code Crim. P. art. 815.

The Court’s Holding

The First Circuit denied Freche’s request for a stay but granted the supervisory writ and vacated the district court’s pretrial denial of the requested instruction. Relying on Hopper v. Evans and State v. White, the court explained that due process requires a lesser-included-offense instruction only when the evidence warrants it.

The court directed the district court to reconsider the requested responsive verdict after all evidence has been submitted. Under La. Code Crim. P. art. 814(C), the district court may exclude the instruction only if the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, would be insufficient to permit a guilty finding on the responsive offense.

Key Takeaways

  • A court should determine whether this responsive-verdict instruction is warranted after hearing all the evidence.
  • The district court’s categorical pretrial denial of the requested instruction was vacated.
  • The instruction may be excluded only if the evidence, viewed most favorably to the State, cannot support conviction of the responsive offense.

Why It Matters

The decision clarifies the timing and evidentiary standard governing a request to instruct the jury on misdemeanor carnal knowledge as a responsive verdict to felony carnal knowledge of a juvenile. Trial courts must assess the completed evidentiary record rather than finally rejecting such an instruction before the evidence is presented.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top