139 So. 3d 14
La. Ct. App.2014Background
- Griffin was convicted of driving while intoxicated, first offense, following a 12 July 2011 stop and arrest in Union Parish.
- On 12 September 2012 Griffin pled guilty; sentence required payment of a $600 fine and costs, plus a 150-day jail term suspended and one year probation with conditions.
- Probation conditions included paying $100 costs of prosecution (COP) to the district attorney and $100 costs of investigation (COI) to the sheriff; Griffin objected but signed the sentence and paid these costs.
- Griffin later moved to reconsider the sentence, challenging COP and COI; the motion was denied, and supervisory review was granted.
- The issue centered on whether COP and COI are recoverable costs under La. C. Cr. P. arts. 887(A) and 895.1(B)(3), and whether proof supports such costs.
- The trial court awarded $100 COP and $100 COI based on an omnibus motion and a May 8, 2006 parish schedule; the court deemed the costs fair and reasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are COP and COI recoverable costs under statutes and case law? | Griffin argues COP/COI are not properly chargeable costs; they should not be routine operating expenses. | District attorney and sheriff contend COP/COI are authorized costs under Art. 887(A) and 895.1(B)(3) and supported by parish schedules. | Costs must be proven to be incurred for a particular prosecution; ordinary operating costs are not recoverable. |
| Must COP/COI be tied to actual incurred costs in Griffin's case? | Costs claimed were general, not case-specific; there is no proof of extraordinary costs incurred in this case. | Omnibus motion and parish schedule justify universal COP/COI in misdemeanor cases. | Costs must bear a true relation to actual prosecution expenses and be incurred for the particular case. |
| Did Griffin’s payment of COP/COI waive appellate rights or render the issue moot? | Payment was involuntary and a preserved objection to COP/COI; waiver does not apply. | Payment before reconsideration could be treated as waiver. | Waiver did not occur; Griffin’s objection remained a valid basis for appeal. |
| Are the costs authorized by R.S. 16:16.1 and related provisions properly limited to district attorney’s and sheriff’s actual costs? | Statutory costs in 16:16.1 and related provisions are not intended for general operating expenses. | Statutory costs are appropriate and routinely assessed in misdemeanor prosecutions. | Costs must reflect actual, case-specific expenses; ordinary operating costs and omnibus claims are not presumptively valid. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Rideau, 943 So.2d 559 (La. App. 3d Cir. 2006) (limits on what costs are recoverable under Art. 887(A); not all state costs are prosecutorial costs)
- State v. Lopes, 805 So.2d 124 (La. 2001) (costs of prosecution are recoverable by those who incurred them; interpreter costs borne by parish)
- Safety Net for Abused Persons v. Segura, 692 So.2d 1038 (La. 1997) (fee not tied to actual prosecution costs violates relation to administration of justice)
- State v. Ratliff, 796 So.2d 101 (La. App. 2d Cir. 2001) (example of court costs awarded based on documented prosecution costs)
- State v. Heath, 513 So.2d 493 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1987) (limits on costs awarded for prosecution expenses; must link to actual charges)
- State v. Ennis, 877 So.2d 300 (La. App. 3d Cir. 2004) (recusal considerations when shifting proceeds do not imply bias per se)