State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop, Inc.
| Citation | 639 So.2d 707 |
| Parties | 93-1316 La |
| Decision Date | 05 July 1994 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Louisiana |
Richard Ieyoub, Atty. Gen., Douglas P. Moreau, Dist. Atty., Thomas Carl Walsh, Jr., Gwendolyn K. Brown, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellant.
John P. Aydell, Jr., Guy E. Wall, Gordon, Arata, McCollam & Duplantis, for appellee.
Meredith Hoag Lieux, Veronica Jones-Matthews, amicus curiae, for Dept. of Environmental Quality.
Mary Patricia Jones, amicus curiae, for Richard P. Ieyoub.
James Clifford Dixon, amicus curiae, for Dept. of Public Safety & Corrections.
George Davidson Fagan, amicus curiae, for Balehi Marine Inc.
[93-1316 La. 1] KIMBALL, Justice. *
The State appeals a judgment of the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal declaring a criminal penalty provision of the Louisiana Hazardous Waste Control Law unconstitutional as a delegation to the executive branch of legislative authority to define a felony. 1 We reverse.
On or about December 5, 1990, defendant William J. Hampton, the owner and operator of defendant All Pro Paint & Body Shop, Inc., paid scrap dealer Freddie Donahue $100.00 to dispose of a number of containers of spent paint thinner generated in the operation of the paint and body shop. Donahue deposited the containers in two uninhabited houses in Baton Rouge. The owner of the houses later discovered the containers and reported the discovery to the authorities.
Officials from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the State Police recovered more than thirty containers containing an estimated 660 gallons of material. Experts subjected samples of material gathered from the containers to laboratory analysis. Each of at least fourteen samples ignited or reached its "flashpoint" at less than 140? Fahrenheit. A [93-1316 La. 2] substance having a flashpoint of less than 140? Fahrenheit or 60? Centigrade is classified as hazardous waste under the Louisiana Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL), La.R.S. 30:2171-2207, and under the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto by DEQ, LAC 33:V.101-5145. Specifically, the HWCL defines hazardous waste as follows:
"Hazardous waste" means any waste, or combination of wastes, which because of its quantity, concentration, physical, or chemical characteristics may cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness, or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed. Such definition shall be applied only to those wastes identified and designated as such by the department, consistent with applicable federal laws and regulations.
La.R.S. 30:2173(2). 2 A DEQ regulation designates as one category of hazardous wastes those materials which exhibit the characteristic of "ignitability" by having a flashpoint of less than 140? Fahrenheit or 60? Centigrade as determined by specified testing procedures. LAC 33:V.4903(A) and (B).
After tracing the containers to Hampton and All Pro, officers obtained a search warrant and seized documents including Hampton's notification to DEQ of an intent to generate hazardous waste on the premises of the paint and body shop, Hampton and All Pro's 1990 Report for Generators of Hazardous Waste, hazardous waste manifest forms for generators, labels for hazardous waste containers listing All Pro's generator identification number, a hazardous waste material profile describing the types of waste the shop would generate and disposal requirements of that waste, and service contracts between Hampton and All Pro and companies authorized to transport and dispose of hazardous waste generated by the paint and body shop. Additionally, DEQ records showed that Hampton and All Pro had filed with DEQ a notification of their intent to transport hazardous wastes and that defendants were authorized by DEQ to transport designated materials in compliance with the HWCL and applicable rules and regulations. Neither Hampton nor All Pro were authorized to store or dispose of hazardous wastes, nor was Freddie Donahue authorized to transport, store, or dispose of hazardous wastes. Needless to say, the residential neighborhood where the containers were found was not a DEQ-authorized disposal site.
[93-1316 La. 3] An East Baton Rouge Parish grand jury indicted Hampton and All Pro for illegal transportation, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste in such a manner that they knew or should have known they thereby placed another person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury, all in violation of La.R.S.30:2183 which provides in pertinent part:
§ 2183. Notice; permits and licenses; enforcement; violations; penalties; notification
A. No later than ninety days after the effective date of the regulations authorized by this Chapter, every person not otherwise exempt who generates, transports, or desires to transport in the state any hazardous waste or who owns, operates, or desires to own or operate a treatment, storage, transfer, or disposal facility which handles hazardous wastes within the state shall file with the secretary or commission a notification stating the nature and location of the activity conducted or desired to be conducted and, if required by regulations, a request for an application for any necessary licenses, permits, schedules of compliance, or performance guidelines....
B. It shall be unlawful to initiate or continue the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous wastes after the time period provided in Subsection A of this Section except in compliance with the notice requirements thereof.
C. Upon receipt of the notices required in Subsection A of this Section or as soon as practicable thereafter, the secretary shall initiate the procedures as required by this Chapter and the regulations applicable thereto for the issuance or denial of permits and licenses and the establishment of schedules of compliance and performance guidelines for facilities and equipment.
....
E. Upon the issuance of a license or permit or the establishment of a schedule of compliance or performance guidelines, it shall be unlawful to transport, treat, store, or dispose of hazardous wastes except in accordance with the terms and conditions thereof and the regulations applicable thereto.
....
G. ...
(2) Any person who knowingly transports, treats, stores, disposes of, or exports any substance in contravention of any provisions of this Chapter or the regulations or of any permit or license terms and conditions adopted in pursuance thereof, or any person who otherwise knowingly violates any provisions of this Chapter, in such manner that he knows, or should have known, at that time that he thereby places another person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury, shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars per day of violation and costs of prosecution, or imprisonment at hard labor for not more than fifteen years, or both. 3
[93-1316 La. 4] The HWCL defines disposal, storage, and transportation as follows:
(1) "Disposal" means the discharge, deposit, injection, dumping, spilling, leaking, or placing of any hazardous waste into or on any land or water so that such waste, or any constituent thereof, may enter the environment or be emitted into the air or discharged into any waters, including ground waters.
....
(4) "Storage" means the containment of hazardous waste on a temporary basis, for such time as may be permitted by regulations, in such a manner as not to constitute disposal of such hazardous waste.
....
(6) "Transportation" means the movement of hazardous wastes from the point of generation or storage to the point of treatment, storage, or disposal by any means of commercial or private transport. The term does not apply to the movement of hazardous wastes on the premises of a hazardous waste generator or on the premises of a permitted hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facility.
Defendants entered pleas of not guilty and filed a motion to quash the indictment alleging the statutory and regulatory scheme governing hazardous waste constitutes an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to the executive branch. The trial court denied the motion to quash and, following a bench trial, acquitted defendants on the charge of illegal storage of hazardous waste and convicted them as principals on the charges of illegal transportation and disposal of hazardous waste in violation of La.R.S. 30:2183(G)(2). The court deferred imposition of sentence pursuant to La.C.Cr.P. art. 893 and placed defendants on active supervised probation for three years with the special conditions that defendants make restitution to DEQ in the amount of $13,500.00, reimburse the State for expert witness fees in the amount of $2142.74, perform 200 hours of community service, pay court costs, and pay $250.00 to Crimestoppers.
On appeal to the Louisiana First Circuit Court of Appeal, Hampton and All Pro argued the evidence was insufficient to uphold their convictions and re-urged their argument in support of their motion to quash the indictment on the grounds the HWCL unconstitutionally delegates legislative authority to the executive branch. The court of appeal, with one member of a three-judge panel dissenting, reversed defendants' convictions and sentences and granted their motion [93-1316 La. 5] to quash the indictment, declaring La.R.S. 30:2183(G)(2) unconstitutional as a delegation to the executive branch of legislative authority to define a felony. State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop, Inc., 618 So.2d 962, 969 (La.App. 1st Cir.1993). 4 The court of appeal rejected defendants' argument that the evidence is insufficient to uphold their convictions, id. at 965,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Rhine
...of the others, except in the instances hereinafter expressly permitted. 25. Fletcher, 163 S.W.3d at 861; State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop, 639 So.2d 707, 712 n. 7 (La. 1994). 26. Fletcher, 163 S.W.3d at 861. The Kentucky court acknowledged that this account was first related in an 1898 Ke......
-
City of Baton Rouge v. Ross
...in connection with the context, and with reference to the purpose of the provision." LSA-R.S. 14:3; State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop, Inc., No. 93-KA-1316, 639 So.2d 707, 712 (La.1994); State v. Azar, 539 So.2d 1222, 1224 (La.1988), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 823, 110 S.Ct. 82, 107 L.Ed.2d 48......
-
Progressive Sec. Ins. Co. v. Foster
...exercise the power which belongs to either of the others. La. Const. Art. II, § 2. Notwithstanding, in State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop, Inc., 93-1316 (La.7/5/94), 639 So.2d 707, we [W]here an enabling statute expresses a clear legislative policy and contains sufficient standards for the ......
-
Barber v. La. Workforce Comm'n
... ... violates the Due Process Clauses of the Federal and State Constitutions; the statutory and administrative system is ... Wayne Acree PLS, Inc. , 15-0905, p. 6 (La. 1/27/16), 187 So.3d 417, 421. Thus, ... State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop, Inc. , 93-1316, p. 6 (La. 7/5/94), 639 So.2d ... ...
-
Act 347, SB 61 – CONTROL DANGER SUBSTANCE: Authorizes the secretary of the Department of Health and Hospitals to issue stop order rules on certain dangerous substances. (8/1/12)
...the other branches.I. The Louisiana Legislature recognizes that the Louisiana Supreme Court, in State v. All Pro Paint & Body Shop, Inc., 639 So. 2d 707 (La. 1994), outlined a three-prong test to evaluate the constitutionality of a statutory delegation of legislative authority. The test pro......