Appeal Dismissed: Cayman Man's 21-Year Sentence Upheld in 2022 Shooting

Luisto Eusebio Hernandez lost his appeal against a 2023 conviction for attempted murder after shooting his housemate twice. The Court of Appeal found no merit in claims of judicial error.

Court of Appeal rejects gunman's bid to overturn attempted murder conviction

Luisto Eusebio Hernandez, 30, has failed to overturn his conviction for shooting his housemate twice during a dispute in 2022, caymannewsservice.com reports. The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal found "no merit" in arguments that the trial judge had mishandled key identification evidence.

Hernandez was convicted in June 2023 of attempted murder and illegal possession of a firearm. He is currently serving a 21-year prison sentence.

At trial, his victim, Nigel Campbell, testified that he and Hernandez had shared a home for more than six years and that he recognised Hernandez as the man who shot him. Campbell told the jury he knew the shooter by his "body features and build" and could even identify "the hand holding the gun." He also noted that he was the grandfather of Hernandez's child.

The appeal centred primarily on the contention that the trial judge gave the jury inadequate legal direction regarding a spontaneous statement — specifically, that someone shouted the name "Luisto" as the gunman approached. Michael Jordan of Kelly Law, who had represented Hernandez at trial, argued that the omission of a proper direction on this point constituted a "grave judicial error."

Hernandez had maintained throughout the trial that he was not the gunman and that Campbell had fabricated the identification over an argument about a mango.

The appellate court rejected all grounds of appeal. The judges agreed with the trial judge's assessment that fabrication by a third party was "impossible to imagine" given the circumstances. They further held that jury directions must be "tailored to fit the case" and that the judge was entitled to handle the evidence as he did.

The appeal judges noted that Campbell had interacted with Hernandez just minutes before the shooting and knew him well. In their view, the central question for the jury was not whether Campbell was mistaken, but whether he was lying.

The court also pointed out that the trial judge had already instructed jurors to first be satisfied that the shout occurred and to consider whether the person who shouted could themselves have been mistaken. Jurors were clearly directed that they could not convict unless they believed Campbell was telling the truth about the events — including both the shout and the identification — a point the judge had made "plain," the appeal court noted.

Source: Google News KY — Crime