State v. Heggar
Louisiana Court of Appeal
908 So. 2d 1245 (2005)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
Lydell Dabney’s new girlfriend, Shadonna Hunter, had previously dated Calvin Heggar (defendant). Heggar moved out of Hunter’s home on November 3, 2003. Five days later, Dabney was at home with his roommate, Kenyotta Duncan. Dabney called Hunter at 1:51 p.m. and sat outside on his porch during the call. Duncan remained inside the house. At one point, Duncan looked out the window and saw a man drive up the driveway in a green Honda Accord and begin talking to Dabney. Duncan did not know Heggar and could not identify him, but Heggar drove a green Honda Accord. Cell-phone records indicated that Dabney and Hunter ended their call at 2:01 p.m. and that Hunter called Dabney again at 2:16 p.m. for a brief conversation. After that second phone conversation, Heggar allegedly shot Dabney eight times. Dabney died, and the State of Louisiana (plaintiff) charged Heggar with murder. The prosecution filed a motion in limine requesting the trial court’s permission for Hunter to testify about the substance of her phone calls with Dabney on the day of the shooting. The court granted the motion over Heggar’s objection, and Hunter testified at trial that Dabney told Hunter during the 1:51 p.m. phone call that Heggar was driving into the driveway. Hunter further testified that during the 2:16 phone call, Dabney told Hunter that he was talking to Heggar and that there was no problem. The jury found Heggar guilty of murder, and he appealed to the Louisiana Court of Appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gaskins, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.