145 So. 3d 1043
La. Ct. App.2014Background
- Royce Toney, Ouachita Parish Sheriff, was federally indicted (21 counts including conspiracy, computer fraud, identity theft, and obstruction).
- Toney asked the Louisiana Board of Ethics (Ethics Board) whether he could use campaign funds to pay legal fees defending the indictment; he converted an advisory request into an application for a declaratory opinion.
- The Ethics Board held (July 20, 2012) that LSA-R.S. 18:1505.21 prohibits using campaign funds for legal fees in connection with these criminal charges—finding the conduct not related to "the holding of public office."
- After the declaratory opinion, Toney pled guilty to misdemeanor computer-access charges (affidavit of counsel included in the record) and sought rehearing; the Ethics Board denied rehearing.
- Toney appealed, arguing the Board ignored prior advisory opinions allowing campaign funds for office-related defenses, mischaracterized the charges as unrelated to office, and improperly excluded a videotape.
- The court treated the Board’s declaratory opinion as reviewable, affirmed the Board’s ruling, and rejected the admission challenge to the videotape.
Issues
| Issue | Toney's Argument | Ethics Board's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court has jurisdiction to review the Board's declaratory opinion | Toney: declaratory opinion is reviewable and presents a justiciable controversy because he needs guidance before spending funds | Board: the opinion is in effect advisory and not reviewable like a Board "decision" | Court: declaratory opinion here presented a justiciable controversy and was appealable; jurisdiction proper |
| Whether campaign funds may be used to pay legal fees for defense of the federal indictment under LSA-R.S. 18:1505.21 | Toney: charges arose from acts related to his duties as sheriff and thus are related to "holding of public office" so campaign funds are permissible | Board: alleged conduct was not related to holding public office; prior advisory opinions support restriction | Court: affirmed Board — use of campaign funds to pay legal fees after guilty plea for conduct charged in indictment is prohibited as unrelated to holding public office |
| Effect of Toney's guilty plea on the declaratory opinion | Toney: (implied) sought ruling irrespective of plea; relied on prior opinions | Board: plea confirms conduct not protected as office-related | Court: plea (entered before rehearing) is in the record and supports prohibition; court noted result might differ absent plea but did not decide that hypothetical |
| Admissibility of videotape of internal affairs investigation | Toney: videotape shows he acted in official capacity during internal investigation, proving office nexus | Board: tape irrelevant; Board counsel stipulated to key facts the tape would show | Court: no abuse of discretion in excluding the videotape where stipulations made tape cumulative and relevancy objection sustained |
Key Cases Cited
- Duplantis v. Louisiana Bd. of Ethics, 782 So.2d 582 (La. 2001) (advisory opinions are non-justiciable; Board decisions are appealable)
- Transit Mgmt. of S. La., Inc. v. Comm’n on Ethics for Pub. Employees, 703 So.2d 576 (La. 1997) (advisory opinions not subject to judicial review)
- In re Lorusso, 85 So.3d 712 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011) (declaring when a Board declaratory opinion presents a justiciable controversy)
- Church Point Wholesale Bev. Co. v. Tarver, 614 So.2d 697 (La. 1993) (courts will not render advisory opinions; requires a justiciable controversy)