State ex rel. T.S.
| Docket Number | 2024-CA-0031 |
| Decision Date | 22 April 2024 |
| Parties | STATE OF LOUISIANA IN THE INTEREST OF T.S. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US |
1
STATE OF LOUISIANA IN THE INTEREST OF T.S.
No. 2024-CA-0031
Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit
April 22, 2024
APPEAL FROM JUVENILE COURT ORLEANS PARISH NO. 2021-218-01-DQ-B/A, SECTION "A" Honorable Clinton Smith
Court composed of Judge Joy Cossich Lobrano, Judge Paula A. Brown, Judge Karen K. Herman) Jason R. Williams District Attorney Brad Scott Chief of Appeals Thomas Frederick Assistant District Attorney Orleans Parish District Attorney's COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT
Aaron Clark-Rizzio Louisiana Center for Children's Rights COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLEE
Joy Cossich Lobrano, Judge
The State of Louisiana ("the State") appeals the December 18, 2023 judgment of the juvenile court that dismissed the State's delinquency petition against T.S. ("Minor"), finding that the State failed to commence the adjudication hearing within the required statutory time period. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
In August 2021, Minor was charged by delinquency petition with one count of armed robbery, a violation of La. R.S. 14:64. A continued custody hearing was conducted on August 10, 2021, at which time the juvenile court found probable cause and set bond. On August 17, 2021, Minor denied the offense charged in the petition, and the matter was set for an adjudication hearing (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "a trial"[1]) on October 6, 2021.
On October 6, 2021, the trial setting was converted to a pre-hearing conference at the request of defense counsel; the juvenile court noted the parties'
"agree[ment] to allow the youth to participate in the Center for Restorative Approach, Restorative Justice Center" and ordered the release of Minor to the custody of his parent/guardian in order to participate in the Restorative Justice program. The court further noted that it was informed that "[u]pon successful completion of said program, . . . the [S]tate may consider resolving this matter."
The case was inactive for an extended period of time to allow time for Minor to participate in the Restorative Justice program. On May 8, 2023, the juvenile court noted that Minor "was arrested on an outstanding warrant on an adult matter out of St. Bernard Parish"[2] and set the matter for a pre-hearing conference on July 11, 2023. The court directed the clerk of court to issue a writ of habeas corpus (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "writ") to the detention facility in St. Bernard Parish to secure Minor's attendance at the conference.
A July 12, 2023 judgment reflects that a pre-hearing conference was conducted on that date, that Minor was not present in court, and that trial was set on September 13, 2023. The judgment further reflects that the court directed the clerk of court to issue a writ for Minor's attendance. A September 14, 2023 judgment reflects that a pre-hearing conference was conducted on that date, that Minor was not present, and that the conference was reset for October 16, 2023 "in order to allow the [S]tate to contact St. Bernard Parish to determine the charges and the posture of the case." The court expressly found good cause for the extension.
Minor was not brought to court on October 16, 2023. Defense counsel requested the matter be reset "in order to determine the status and/or outcome of
[the St. Bernard Parish] matter," and the court reset the matter for a status hearing on November 28, 2023, finding good cause for the extension. On November 28, 2023, the juvenile court set the case for trial on December 18, 2023 and directed the clerk of court to issue a writ for Minor's attendance. The court informed the parties that no further continuances would be granted.
Minor was not brought to court for trial on December 18, 2023. Defense counsel requested that the State not be granted a continuance arguing that "the State of Louisiana . . . [was] holding [Minor] against his will in [the St. Bernard Parish] jail[,] [a]nd so, the inability for [Minor] to be brought to trial [was] entirely within the state's control." In response, the prosecutor noted that, independent of the writ issued by the clerk of court, the State had issued a writ to secure Minor's attendance, and requested a continuance and finding of good cause for extending the statutory deadline to commence an adjudication hearing. The juvenile judge noted he confirmed receipt of service by the St. Bernard Parish detention facility of the writ for trial scheduled that day. The court denied the State's request for a continuance and dismissed the delinquency action on the ground that the adjudication hearing was not commenced timely pursuant to La. Ch.C. art. 877. This appeal followed.
DISCUSSION
The Louisiana Children's Code explicitly provides time limitations within which the State must adjudicate juvenile delinquency matters. La. Ch.C. art. 877(B) states that "[i]f the child is not continued in custody, the adjudication hearing shall commence within ninety days of the appearance to answer the petition." Additionally, La. Ch.C. art. 877(D) provides that "[f]or good cause, the court may extend such period." If the hearing is not timely commenced, "upon
motion of the child, the court shall release a child continued in custody and shall dismiss the petition." La. Ch.C. art. 877(C).
The State argues that the juvenile court lacked authority to dismiss the petition under La. Ch.C. art. 877 because Minor did not move for dismissal. The State further argues that, even had a motion to dismiss been filed, dismissal would not have been appropriate because the delays to commence an adjudication hearing had not run. Specifically, the State maintains that the October 16, 2023 order resetting the matter for a status conference and finding good cause for the extension, without setting a specific date to which the limitation period was extended or a trial date, operated to extend the art. 877 time limit an additional ninety days.
The State claims that the Supreme Court's ruling in State in the Interest of M.P., 20-00567 (La. 11/4/20), T.S., governs the resolution of the first issue. In M.P., the Supreme Court reviewed this Court's ruling reversing the juvenile court and dismissing the adjudication as untimely. Id., 20-00567, p. 1, 303 So.3d at 622-23. There, the adjudication was continued several times until it finally occurred nearly seven months after the juvenile answered the petition. However, while the juvenile objected to the continuances and findings of good cause, the juvenile never sought supervisory review of those adverse rulings, nor did the juvenile file a motion to dismiss, as required by La. Ch.C. art. 877(C). Accordingly, the Supreme Court found that this Court erred in reversing the juvenile court and reinstated the juvenile court's adjudication and disposition. Id.
Similar to the juvenile in M.P., Minor did not file a motion to dismiss. Minor concedes in his appellate brief that that "this case is controlled by . . . State in Interest of M.P." and that "dismissal was improper" since he "never moved to
dismiss."[3] We agree with the parties on this issue. It is undisputed that Minor did not move for dismissal. Therefore, the juvenile court had no authority to dismiss the petition under La. Ch.C. art. 877.
The State's second...
To continue reading
Request your trial