Preview:

STATE OF LOUISIANA IN THE INTEREST OF T.H.

* *

NO. 2012-CA-0223 COURT OF APPEAL

* FOURTH CIRCUIT * STATE OF LOUISIANA *******

APPEAL FROM JUVENILE COURT ORLEANS PARISH NO. 2011-284-01-DQ-E, SECTION "E" Honorable Tracey Flemings-Davillier, Judge ****** Judge Terri F. Love ****** (Court composed of Judge Terri F. Love, Judge Max N. Tobias, Jr., Judge Paul A. Bonin) BONIN, J., DISSENTS. Tenee Felix JUVENILE REGIONAL SERVICES 1820 St. Charles Avenue, Suite 205 New Orleans, LA 70130 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT/T.H. Leon A. Cannizzaro, Jr. District Attorney Felicity Strachan Assistant District Attorney 619 South White Street New Orleans, LA 70119 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE/STATE OF LOUISIANA AFFIRMED December 12, 2012

This appeal arises from the juvenile court's denial of a juvenile's motion to suppress evidence, a handgun, which was discovered during a pat-down for officer safety. Once the juvenile court denied his motion to suppress evidence, the

juvenile entered a plea, pursuant to State v. Crosby, 338 So. 2d 584 (La. 1976), for a violation of La. R.S. 14:95.8, illegal possession of a handgun by a juvenile, and preserved his right to appeal the denial of the motion to suppress evidence. The juvenile court committed the juvenile to the Department of Public Safety and Corrections for placement in a non-secure facility for a term not to exceed six months, with fifteen days suspended, and one year of active probation. We find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to suppress evidence based on the totality of the circumstances in this case and affirm. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On Saturday, October 8, 2011, at approximately 9:57 p.m., Officers Kevin Doucette and Patrice Swan of the New Orleans Police Department were on proactive patrol in the Seventh District in New Orleans East. According to Officer Doucette, he and his partner were looking for people who were committing crimes in that area, which "experienced an increase in property and persons crimes."

1

As Officer Doucette was driving the marked police car on Lourdes Street and attempted to make a left turn onto Corsica Place, he stated that he observed four juveniles, including T.H.,1 walking in the street. Upon stopping and exiting the police car, Officers Doucette and Swan called the four juveniles to the front of the police car. Three of the juveniles walked to the police car; T.H. continued to walk away. Officer Doucette approached T.H, escorted him to the police car, and directed him to place his hands on the police car. Officer Doucette conducted a pat-down of T.H. and retrieved an unloaded handgun. T.H. was then arrested. Pursuant to the Louisiana Children's Code, a petition alleging T.H. to be delinquent was filed based upon the alleged commission of illegal possession of a handgun by a juvenile, a violation of La. R.S. 14:95.8. The juvenile court found probable cause for T.H.'s arrest, remanded him, and set bond at $15,000.00. T.H. pled not guilty. The suppression hearing and the adjudication hearing were held on the same date. The suppression hearing was conducted first, and the juvenile court denied the juvenile's motion to suppress the handgun. T.H. entered a Crosby plea,2 preserving his right to appeal the denial of the motion to suppress evidence. Following a disposition hearing, which examined the pre-dispositional investigation, the juvenile court imposed a disposition of commitment to the Department of Public Safety and Corrections for placement in a non-secure facility for a term not to exceed six months, with fifteen days suspended, and one year of active probation. T.H.'s appeal followed.

1

To maintain the confidentiality of the proceedings required by Louisiana Children's Code Articles 407 and 412, initials for the juvenile defendant in this case are used. 2 The Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Crosby, 338 So. 2d 584 (La. 1976) held that a defendant may enter into a plea agreement and maintain his right to appeal pre-plea rulings.

2

MOTION TO SUPPRESS T.H. contends that the juvenile court erred in denying his motion to suppress the handgun, since the handgun was allegedly obtained in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights under the United States Constitution and Article I,

Download 320462.pdf

Louisiana Law