Catania ex rel. Daughter v. Sheriff Jack Stephens & the St. Bernard Parish Sheriff's Office Michael Vincent Catania
| Decision Date | 17 March 2015 |
| Docket Number | C/W NO. 2014 CA 1295,NO. 2014 CA 1294,2014 CA 1294 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
| Parties | KRIS CATANIA, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF HER MINOR DAUGHTER, HALAYNA CATANIA, AND HALEY CATANIA v. SHERIFF JACK STEPHENS AND THE ST. BERNARD PARISH SHERIFF'S OFFICE MICHAEL VINCENT CATANIA, JR. AND BRITTANY LYNN CATANIA v. SHERIFF JACK STEPHENS AND THE ST. BERNARD PARISH SHERIFF'S OFFICE |
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
Appealed from the 18th Judicial District Court in and for the Parish of Iberville, Louisiana
Plaintiffs appeal the trial court's judgment granting summary judgment in favor of defendants and dismissing, with prejudice, their claims against defendants. For the reasons that follow, we amend in part and affirm.
Michael Catania, the deceased husband of plaintiff, Kris Catania, had previously been married to Dorinda Catania, a St. Bernard Parish resident. At all times pertinent hereto, Michael was a resident of Iberville Parish. Following his divorce from Dorinda, Michael's child support obligation was court ordered. When Michael fell into arrears on his child support payments, Dorinda initiated charges against him in St. Bernard Parish for criminal neglect of family. On Septembers, 2009, Dorinda executed an affidavit for an arrest warrant for Michael. Both the affidavit and the subsequent arrest warrant were signed by Justice of the Peace Howard Luna.
According to Dorinda, she faxed the affidavit to Deputy Maria Small of the Iberville Parish Sheriff's Office ("IPSO"), and Deputy Small advised her that the affidavit was not sufficient to arrest Michael. Rather, Deputy Small told her that the St. Bernard Parish Sheriff's Office ("SBPSO") would need to fax the warrant to her. Dorinda testified that SBPSO confirmed with her that they were sending a copy of the warrant to IPSO.
On September 22, 2009, Michael surrendered himself in St. Bernard Parish, where he was arrested and incarcerated in the St. Bernard Parish jail. On September 23, 2009, SBPSO marked the warrant satisfied in its ARMMS system. Michael remained incarcerated until January 14, 2010, when he pled guilty to the charges and was sentenced to 6 months in parish prison, suspended, and placed on unsupervised probation, with certain conditions, including a sentence of 114 days in parish prison with credit for time served. On July 3, 2010, Michael committed suicide.
Deputy Small, a 25-year employee of IPSO, testified that she is the Chief Criminal Deputy Secretary and has been in charge of the Warrants Division for approximately 17 years. According to Deputy Small, she received the warrant for Michael's arrest on September 21, 2009, and entered it into her computer as an active warrant on the sameday. Subsequently, when Deputy Small learned that Michael was deceased, she contacted SBPSO to advise them of Michael's death. Deputy Small spoke with Kathy Bayham and advised her that IPSO would be recalling the warrant from their system. Deputy Small recalled the warrant on July 6/2010.
Deputy Small indicated that the normal recall procedure for warrants was that the issuing Sheriff's office would either call or fax with notice that the warrant was to be recalled. Deputy Small explained further:
Q. So it's your testimony that the only time that you would recall a warrant is when some parish calls you to tell you that it's been satisfied?
A. They can fax me something or they can call me.
Q. Should, in your opinion, in your 25 years of experience, should the St. Bernard Parish Sheriff's Office, when a warrant is satisfied, call every sheriff in the state of Louisiana and tell them that
A. If they sent it --
Q. -- or fax it to them?
A. If they sent it to every parish in the state of Louisiana, they should. That's how I do my warrants. I have something attached that wherever I sent it to and if it's recalled, I recall it from all of the parishes that I sent it to.
Deputy Small testified that she had no knowledge of when or even if Michael was ever arrested in St. Bernard Parish. When shown a computer printout from SBPSO's ARMMS system reflecting Michael's warrant "SATISFIED BY ARREST" as of September 23, 2009, Deputy Small indicated that she would have expected to be notified by either phone or fax that Michael's warrant was satisfied. Deputy Small did note, however, that while both IPSO and SBPSO each have an ARMMS system, the two were not connected.
In a sworn affidavit, Colonel Peter Tufaro, the commander/supervisor of the Criminal Records Division of SBPSO, confirmed that there is no connection between the ARMMS system in St. Bernard and the ARMMS system in Iberville. Colonel Tufaro further noted that the warrant issued by Justice of the Peace Luna on September 3, 2009, for Michael's arrest was not entered into the NCIC system by SBPSO. Finally, Colonel Tufaro explained that he conducted a search of the records maintained by SBPSO and wasunable to locate any record indicating that any employee of SBPSO notified IPSO of the warrant issued by Justice of the Peace Luna for Michael's arrest on September 3, 2009.
Deputy Kathy Bayham indicated that she started: working for SBPSO 5 years ago. She handles the daily operations of the Criminal Records Division. With regard to warrants, Deputy Bayham testified that she was involved with every aspect, i.e., entering the warrants into ARMMS, issuing the warrants, and recalling warrants. When asked about the communication between SBPSO and IPSO, concerning the status of the arrest warrant following Michael's incarceration, the following colloquy occurred:
Q. I will follow up on what Mr. Tillery was doing. I think we agree that when St. Bernard Parish entered into its [ARMMS] System the arrest warrant for Mr. Catania that in and of itself entering into the [ARMMS] System would not have told any other Sheriff's office that an arrest warrant existed. They have to ask or find out some other way?
A. Correct.
Q. You are speculating a little bit and I understand that. You were not there. One way or another the St. Bernard Parish Sheriff's Office faxed a physical copy of the arrest warrant at somebody's request?
A. Correct.
. . . .
Q. To Iberville Parish?
A. Uh-huh (affirmative response.)
Q. Now, what would prevent St. Bernard, your criminal records section from noting in the [ARMMS] entry or any other records your department thinks would be reliable a note to the [effect] ... be sure to get back with them if or when it is satisfied? What would stop that from happening? That is just noting we faxed a physical copy of the arrest warrant to another parish; be sure to get back to them when it is satisfied?
A. We faxed them a warrant to be honest with you. If you faxed them an open warrant and they offered information, why wouldn't they call months later to see if the warrant was still good? That is what I would do if the shoe was on the other foot. I would never arrest anybody ... without finding out if this warrant from a few months, next year, or last year, or 10 years from now -- we go through that a lot. You might have a warrant for 10 years. You have got -- the only safe way ... to avoid human error is to check with [the other] agency to see if it is still good.
Q. Is there anything that would keep the St, Bernard Parish Sheriff's Office from making a note in the -- sounds like relatively few instances -- when an arrest warrant is ... actually sent to another Sheriff's office to note that be sure to give Iberville a call if this is deemed satisfied; let them know?
To continue reading
Request your trial