Opinion
NUMBER 2015 CA 1425
06-06-2016
LEWIS BROWN v. LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS
Lewis Brown Angola, LA Plaintiff/Appellant Pro Se Terri L. Cannon Baton Rouge, LA Defendant/Appellee Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
Appealed from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana
Suit Number C626248 Honorable Todd Hernandez, Presiding Lewis Brown
Angola, LA Plaintiff/Appellant
Pro Se Terri L. Cannon
Baton Rouge, LA Defendant/Appellee
Louisiana Department of Public
Safety and Corrections BEFORE: GUIDRY, HOLDRIDGE, AND CHUTZ, JJ. GUIDRY, J.
In this action seeking judicial review of an adverse decision in an administrative remedy proceeding, Lewis Brown appeals from the district court's judgment dismissing his petition for judicial review. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
In 1972, Brown pled guilty to aggravated rape, and he was subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment. Brown filed an ARP in 2007, LSP-2007-4004, wherein he claimed that his incarceration beyond the initial ten years and six months of the original life sentence violated his constitutional rights. Specifically, Brown contended that at the time he was sentenced to life imprisonment, La. R.S. 15:571.7, commonly referred to as the "10-6 law," provided that he would only have to serve ten years and six months in the custody of the Department of Public Safety and Corrections (Department) to satisfy his life sentence. However, Brown further alleged that at the time he requested commutation of his sentence in 1982, the Department had adopted a "new" policy prohibiting anyone at the Louisiana State Penitentiary from making recommendations for commutation of life sentences. As such, he contended that this new policy violated his constitutional rights, as well as the Louisiana governor's exclusive constitutional right to commute sentences.
Brown was denied relief at both administrative levels. Thereafter, Brown filed an appeal of the Department's decision in the Nineteenth Judicial District Court, which dismissed his petition for judicial review upon recommendation of the commissioner. Thereafter, Brown filed an appeal with this court, and in Brown v. LeBlanc, 09-1602 (La. App. 1st Cir. 3/26/10) (unpublished opinion), this court affirmed the district court's judgment.
Brown subsequently filed the current petition for judicial review in the Nineteenth Judicial District Court, which was based on the same ARP number. The petition for judicial review also incorporated a claim for writ of habeas corpus. In both the ARP and the writ of habeas corpus, Brown again complained about the Department's failure to provide him with a 10-6 hearing pursuant to former La. R.S. 15:571.7. The Department filed exceptions to Brown's petition, asserting that Brown's claims are perempted, prescribed, and that Brown failed to state a cause of action.
Brown and the commissioner indicate that the instant ARP was consolidated with a writ of habeas corpus that Brown had filed in the Twentieth Judicial District Court, which was transferred to the Nineteenth Judicial District Court. However, the record on appeal does not contain any evidence of a filing in the Twentieth Judicial District Court nor of a consolidation or transfer of said filing.
Following a hearing on the Department's exceptions, the commissioner for the Nineteenth Judicial District Court issued a report recommending that both Brown's petition for judicial review and request for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed as res judicata, as the issues raised in both the petition for judicial review and the writ of habeas corpus had been previously litigated. After a de novo consideration of the administrative record, the district court signed a judgment adopting the commissioner's reasons as stated in his report and ordering that the Department's decision be affirmed and that Brown's appeal be dismissed with prejudice.
From our review of the record, we find no error in the district court's judgment. The issues raised in Brown's petition for judicial review, including the writ of habeas corpus, were identical to issues raised in the previous appeal and are therefore res judicata. See Brown v. LeBlanc, 09-1602 (La. App. 1st Cir. 3/26/10) (unpublished opinion).
See La. R.S. 13:4231; see also Morrison v. LeBlanc, 14-0332 (La. App. 1st Cir. 12/23/14) (unpublished opinion).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment dismissing Brown's petition for judicial review with prejudice in accordance with Uniform Rules— Courts of Appeal 2-16.2(A)(5), (7), and (8). All costs of this appeal are assessed to Lewis Brown.
We note that in his appellate brief, Brown raises as error the district court's failure to give effect to a writ of habeas corpus that he claims was granted by Judge Wilson Fields on August 3, 2012. However, the record is devoid of any evidence regarding any prior writ of habeas corpus that may have been filed and/or ruled upon. Accordingly, we find this argument to be without merit. --------
AFFIRMED.