Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO: 06-1851, SECTION: R(6).
August 25, 2009
ORDER
Before the Court is plaintiff Lionel Reddit's objection to Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. (R. Doc. 7). The Report dismissed with prejudice Mr. Reddit's petition for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (R. Doc. 6). Having reviewed de novo the petition, the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and Mr. Reddit's objections to the Report and Recommendation, the Court approves the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. The Court writes separately only to clarify the legal standard applicable to Reddit's claim that his attorney's failure to file a motion to quash his indictment based on double jeopardy amounted to ineffective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment.
The Report and Recommendation analyzed petitioner's double jeopardy argument under the federal constitutional standard-the same elements test. See United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688, 696 (1993). As first articulated in Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 303 (1932), the same elements test evaluates whether each statutory offense under which a defendant is charged contains an element not contained in the other. Id. If the two statutory offenses contain the same elements, the Fifth Amendment Double Jeopardy Clause bars additional punishment or successive prosecution. Id. In short, the same elements test inquires into whether each defined offense "requires proof of at least one fact, [or] one element which the other offense does not." United States v. Nation, 832 F.2d 71, 73 (5th Cir. 1987).
Double jeopardy protections are both federal and state, however. The Louisiana Constitution, and the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 591 also protect a defendant from successive prosecutions or multiple punishments for the same offense. State v. Coody, 448 So. 2d 100, 102 (La. 1984) (citing U.S. Const. amend. V; La.Const. art. 1, § 15). Louisiana applies a different legal standard to determine a violation of state double jeopardy laws — the same evidence test. State v. Sandifer, 679 So. 2d 1324, 1329 (La. 1996). The same evidence test "focuses upon the actual physical and testimony evidence necessary to secure a conviction." Id. In essence, it asks "if the evidence required to support a finding of guilt of one crime would also support a conviction for another offense." Id. In comparison to the federal constitutional standard, the same evidence test is broader in scope, and more protective of defendant's rights. See Louisiana v. Williams, 978 So.2d 895, 897 (La. 2008).
"No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of life or liberty for the same offense, except, when on his own motion, a new trial has been granted or judgment has been arrested, or where there has been a mistrial legally ordered under the provisions of Article 775 or ordered with the express consent of the defendant." La. Code Crim. Proc. art. 591.
This test is also known as the "same conduct test." See State v. Leverich, 269 P.2d 1390 (1974) (finding that negligent homicide and reckless driving charges violated state double jeopardy laws because "both were based on the [conduct] of operating a motor vehicle a certain way.").
Mr. Reddit claims that his trial counsel was ineffective because he did not file a motion to quash the bill of information for violation of double jeopardy laws. (R. Doc. 1). The Magistrate Judge did not evaluate petitioner's claim under the same evidence test. Rather, the Magistrate Judge evaluated the claim only under the federal constitutional standard. This distinction is an important one, however. The greater protection provided by Louisiana state double jeopardy law increases the likelihood that Reddit's counsel was ineffective in not filing a motion to quash.
Evaluating Reddit's claim under the Louisiana save evidence test, the Court finds that petitioner still cannot show that his counsel's failure to move to quash the bill of information was objectively unreasonable, or that he was prejudiced by his counsel's failure to file the motion. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984). Reddit was charged with second degree kidnaping under La.Rev.Stat. § 14:44.1 and armed robbery under La.Rev.Stat. § 14:64. (R. Doc. 1). The evidence required to secure Reddit's conviction under both statutorily defined offenses is quite different. And, evidence used to convict Reddit for either armed robbery or second degree kidnaping would not be sufficient in itself to convict Reddit for the other. See generally, State v. Coody, 448 So.2d 100, 104 (La. 1984) (upholding a motion to quash where the bill of information purported to use evidence to convict defendant on one charge, that would suffice to convict the defendant on a second charge).
The Court hereby affirms the Magistrate Judge's ruling that Lionel Reddit's petition for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus be DISMISSED with prejudice.