Armed robbery conviction vacated by appeals court

The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third District, on June 5, vacated the armed robbery charge Dannie Lee Lafleur was found guilty of by a 13th Judicial District Court jury in Ville Platte on June 20, 2012. However, the charge of first-degree murder during the robbery of TAT Nail Salon in early May 2011, and its sentence of life in prison without parole or probation, was validated by the court of appeal.

The armed robbery conviction that was vacated carried a sentence of 25 years in prison, to run concurrently with the life sentence for the murder conviction.

In the Ville Platte trial of Lafleur, he was charged with the murder of Tuc Thanh Do. In a separate count, Lafleur was charged with armed robbery of the nail salon, which was owned by Tuc Thanh Do and his wife, Thao Thi Thanh Le.

The court of appeal, in its June 5 ruling, quoted from the prosecution’s closing arguments in the June 2012 trial in Ville Platte. The quote, in part, stated, “Money was taken from Mr. Do, from the nail shop in his control by the use of force or armed with a weapon.”

The appeals court June 5 ruling stated “the defendant was charged with the first degree murder of Tuc Thanh Do based on armed robbery as the underlying felony... it is well-settled that convictions for both a felony murder and the underlying felony violate double jeopardy protection.”

During testimony in the robbery/murder trial in Ville Platte in June 2012, Le, the wife, testified she and two customers in the nail salon ran into a back room after seeing a man at the locked front door of the nail salon who shot at the door, and then they heard a robber demanding money.

She testified she heard two more shots while in the back room, then emerged from the back room to see Do and the robber struggling over the money before she saw her husband shot in the chest. She then testified she saw the robber shoot him again after Do grabbed the robber’s leg.

The appeals court’s ruling on June 5, stated prosecutors argued against the murder and armed robbery amounting to double jeopardy by stating they could have “separately charged the defendant with the armed robbery of the victim’s wife...”

Prosecutors cited a 1989 court case they argued supported that assertion, but the appeals court stated “we do not find that it supports the state’s position in this case.”

The appeals court ruled the 1989 case determined “the double jeopardy clause bars prosecution for both felony murder and the underlying felony.” Lafleur’s attorney argued that the armed robbery charge was the “underlying felony,” that constituted double jeopardy.

In the appeals court’s June 5, summation, Judge Jimmie C. Peters wrote that in Lafleur’s trial in Ville Platte, “there is one armed robbery with two victims, and the state opted in its presentation of the evidence to designate the armed robbery as the underlying felony offense.”

After the appeals court ruling was made, Evangeline Parish District Attorney Trent Brignac said he was pleased with Judge Peters’ findings.