198 So. 3d 283
La. Ct. App.2016Background
- Wells convicted of aggravated robbery in 2004, sentenced as a multiple offender to 40 years; post-conviction and appellate remedies were denied; he remains incarcerated.
- Since 2006 Wells filed multiple motions in his criminal docket seeking production of documents and pursued writ applications in appellate courts challenging those rulings.
- In August 2015 Wells filed a pro se mandamus action in the Civil District Court (Orleans Parish) under the Public Records Act seeking documents he alleges were denied, naming the Criminal District Court, the judge, a court reporter, and others as defendants.
- The Civil District Court set the matter for a contradictory hearing on the briefs only, denied Wells’s request to be physically present, and denied appointment of counsel.
- Appellees responded that Wells had been provided all requested documents except an untranscribed voir dire from a 2004 mistrial, argued no public‑records request was shown, and raised an exception of no cause of action.
- The Civil District Court dismissed the mandamus action with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction; Wells appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court erred by denying Wells’s in‑court presence at the contradictory hearing | Wells argued he should be present for the hearing | Appellees argued hearing on briefs was sufficient and prisoner's presence not required | Denial of physical presence and hearing on briefs was within trial court discretion; no abuse found |
| Whether the Civil District Court had jurisdiction over Wells’s mandamus/public‑records claim | Wells argued the court could review denial of records and grant mandamus relief | Appellees argued civil court lacks jurisdiction to review acts of the Criminal District Court and Wells failed to show a proper public‑records request was made | Civil court lacked jurisdiction because Wells provided no evidence of a formal public‑records request to a custodian; criminal court acts not reviewable by civil court |
| Whether Wells was entitled to civil penalties under the Public Records Act | Wells sought penalties for denial of records | Appellees disputed entitlement and noted lack of proper request and relevance | Court did not reach penalty issue after finding lack of jurisdiction; appeal affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Landis v. Moreau, 779 So.2d 691 (La. 2000) (mandamus under Public Records Act is a civil action)
- Ballard v. Spradley, 557 F.2d 476 (5th Cir. 1977) (factors for inmate presence at civil trial)
- Pollard v. White, 738 F.2d 1124 (11th Cir. 1984) (prisoner access to civil courts does not guarantee physical presence at trial)
- Price v. Johnston, 334 U.S. 266 (U.S. 1948) (incarceration permits withdrawal or limitation of certain rights)
- Monroe v. New Orleans Police Dep’t, 150 So.3d 354 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2014) (applying Ballard factors and approving submission by brief in lieu of physical presence)
- Connick v. Ward, 351 So.2d 250 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1977) (civil district court may not review acts of criminal district court)
- Angelico v. Cannizzaro, 543 So.2d 1064 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1989) (civil judge has no jurisdiction over criminal judge acting in official capacity)
- Leeper v. Leeper, 21 So.3d 1006 (La. App. 2 Cir. 2009) (prisoner’s presence at civil trial is discretionary)