• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Anty update


Regular Member
Sep 7, 2007
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA
imported post

The boy better get used to eating honey buns.


Judge allows prosecutors use of evidence in killing

  • Advocate Baker - Zachary bureau
  • Published: Mar 5, 2010 - Page: 2B

Comments (0)

CLINTON — A state district judge ruled Thursday that prosecutors can use much of the evidence gathered from a house where a man was killed during a drug deal last year, including a cell phone that made an audio recording of the fatal encounter.

An East Feliciana Parish grand jury indicted Anthony Manzella, 20, of Hammond, for first-degree murder in the shooting death of Jeral Wayne Matthews Jr., 21, on July 24 in Clinton.

The grand jury also indicted Manzella’s friend, Andrew Robertson, 23, and the shooting victim’s acquaintance, Johnny Barnes, 27, of Jackson, for principal to second-degree murder.

Clinton police said Manzella and Robertson went to a house on Kennedy Street to buy drugs from Matthews and Barnes, but during the transaction, Matthews allegedly struck Manzella in the head with a rifle butt.

Manzella responded by pulling a .40-caliber handgun and shooting Matthews, Clinton Police Chief Eddie Stewart said.

Attorneys for the three defendants asked 20th Judicial District Judge George H. Ware Jr. to throw out evidence found at the crime scene because Clinton police did not obtain a search warrant for the shotgun-style residence.

After hearing testimony from three Clinton police officers and a state attorney general’s computer analyst, Ware ruled the state can use at trials items that were “in plain sight” when officers learned of the shooting and went to check on Matthews.

An iPhone that police linked to Manzella was resting on a plastic storage bin in the bedroom where the drug transaction and shooting occurred, officers testified.

District Attorney Sam D’Aquilla said the phone contained a short recording made during the incident, in which voices and a muffled gunshot can be heard. The recording also was sent to another person’s telephone and recovered by police.

The judge said prosecutors can use another cell phone, drug scales, a box of bullets, a spent .40-caliber bullet casing, an unspent bullet, a McDonald’s bag appearing to contain marijuana, assorted pills, Manzella’s keys, a woman’s driver’s license, cash and a white powder taken from Barnes and an assault rifle.

Ware also said prosecutors can use statements the defendants gave to police after the shooting.

georg jetson

Regular Member
Sep 14, 2009
Slidell, Louisiana
imported post

I don't see anything in this article that would indicate that the chances for a conviction has gone up or down. A motion to suppress evidence has to be filed according to CCRP 521. This means it USUALLY must be filed pretrial. A competent attorney will make this argument even if he knows there's only a small chance of having the motion sustained because of this. Use it or lose it.

[align=justify]Art. 703. Motion to suppress evidence [/align] [align=justify]A. A defendant adversely affected may move to suppress any evidence from use at the trial on the merits on the ground that it was unconstitutionally obtained.[/align] [align=justify]B. A defendant may move on any constitutional ground to suppress a confession or statement of any nature made by the defendant.[/align] [align=justify]C. A motion filed under the provisions of this Article must be filed in accordance with Article 521, unless opportunity therefor did not exist or neither the defendant nor his counsel was aware of the existence of the evidence or the ground of the motion, or unless the failure to file the motion was otherwise excusable. The court in its discretion may permit the filing of a motion to suppress at any time before or during the trial.[/align][align=justify](snip)[/align][align=justify]