88 So. 3d 1205
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- K.G., a juvenile, participated in NOPD's Electronic Monitoring Program with an ankle bracelet.
- On September 15, 2011, K.G. was petitioned for tampering with surveillance or electronic monitoring equipment (La. R.S. 14:110.3) and appeared for a custody hearing without the bracelet.
- An adjudication hearing on October 11, 2011 featured testimony from Officer Shannon Brewer and Deputy Earl Fox; KG presented no witnesses.
- Brewer testified the alert indicated the device had been removed at 1:50 a.m. on September 12, 2011; she had affixed the bracelet and stated only NOPD personnel could remove it; no authorized removal occurred.
- Fox testified he found the bracelet at its last location—the ground at Buffalo Road and Wales Street—where pins were broken; the device can only be removed by breaking the pins with a specialized tool; KG was not in the area when found.
- KG was adjudicated delinquent for tampering and committed for three months; she appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the evidence sufficient to prove tampering beyond a reasonable doubt? | KG argues the evidence is circumstantial and fails to exclude all innocence. | State contends the device cannot fall off and the tamper is shown by broken pins and location. | Yes; evidence suffices beyond a reasonable doubt to prove tampering. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (requires review of sufficiency of evidence to support conviction)
- State ex rel. W.B., 11 So.3d 60 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2009) (great deference to factual findings in juvenile adjudications)
- State in the Interest of T.E., 787 So.2d 414 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2001) (juvenile delinquency standard of review)
- State in the Interest of A.G., 630 So.2d 909 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1993) (standard of proof in delinquency cases parallels criminal standard)
- State in the Interest of C.B., 28 So.3d 525 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2009) (circumstantial evidence framework under La. 15:438)
- State in the Interest of Batiste, 367 So.2d 784 (La. 1979) (clear fndg standard for appellate review in delinquency)
- State ex rel. E.D.C., 903 So.2d 571 (La. App. 2d Cir. 2005) (situational context for appellate review in juvenile matters)