The 25-year sentence for a Lake Charles man convicted of vehicular homicide and two counts of first-degree vehicular negligent injuring will stand.

Blaine Keith Lecompte was driving a mother and her two daughters on Interstate 10 westbound on Feb. 2, 2001, when he crashed into the back of an 18-wheeler that was slowing down. Lecompte was going about 70 mph. A blood draw taken several hours after the accident showed he had a blood alcohol content of .11 as well as .2 nanograms per milliliter or less of the active THC metabolite.

One of the girls in the car, 3-year-old Nina Sally, died as a result of the crash. Her 7-year-old sister suffered a broken collar bone. Their mother suffered protracted loss to her foot.

On Feb. 27, 2023, Lecompte plead guilty to all three charges. He was sentenced to 25 years for vehicular homicide and five years each for the two counts of vehicular negligent injuring. The two counts of vehicular negligent injuring were to be served concurrently with each other but consecutively to the vehicular homicide charge, for a total of 30 years of incarceration.

On Aug. 17, 2023, Lecompte filed a motion to reconsider sentence, and following a hearing on Oct. 13, the trial court resentenced him to 20 years for vehicular homicide. The two counts of vehicular negligent injuring were still to be served concurrently with each other but consecutively to the vehicular homicide charge, for a total of 25 years of incarceration. Following a hearing on Nov. 6 the trial court modified the sentence to specify that five years of the 20-year sentence for vehicular homicide must be served without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence.

Lecompte appealed the sentencing, claiming his convictions all arise from the same conduct and that the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing him to serve the two, five-year sentences for first-degree vehicular negligent injuring consecutively to the 20-year hard labor sentence for vehicular homicide. He specifically notes the trial court erred in not articulating a particular justification for ordering consecutive sentences.

Lecompte claims the circumstances of this case do not justify the assessment that he poses a “grave risk” and points out he is not a habitual drinker who never learns from his mistakes.

The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal has denied his claim, stating Lecompte’s blood alcohol concentration was acquired from drinking seven or more 16-ounce cans of beer prior to entering the vehicle and driving across state lines with a mother and her two young children in the vehicle. He was also driving with a suspended license.

“He also had marijuana in his system, which due to the cross interactions would increase the impairment of both substances,” the court stated. “Of particular note is the fact that Mr. Lecompte was driving over 70 miles per hour in a construction zone and never hit his brakes before colliding with an 18-wheeler. Further, Mr. Lecompte initially attempted to frame the mother for his own actions whilst showing no apparent concern for the children trapped in the backseat of a smoking car.”

The court reiterated that a child died in the crash while her sister is having “significant lasting social issues.” In addition, “the mother of the two children was mangled such that her foot was practically severed from her ankle.”