Opinion
NO. 2016 KW 0635
06-28-2016
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. LARRY FRANKLIN
In Re: State of Louisiana, applying for supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 03-12-1025. BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C.J., GUIDRY AND PETTIGREW, JJ.
WRIT GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The trial court's ruling was correct in finding that Reserve Deputy Pippen did not have the authority to detain or arrest the defendant. However, the facts and circumstances indicate that the pre-detention interactions between Reserve Deputy Pippen and the defendant may not have risen to such a level as would implicate the Fourth Amendment or La. Const. art. I, § 5. On remand, the trial court is instructed to determine what, if any, evidence from these pre-detention interactions should be suppressed. In so doing, the trial court should consider the cases of U.S. v. Crews, 445 U.S. 463, 474, 100 S.Ct. 1244, 1251, 63 L.Ed.2d 537 (1980); State v. Fisher, 97-1133, (La. 9/9/98), 720 So.2d 1179, 1183 ("mere communications between officers and citizens implicate no Fourth Amendment concerns where there is no coercion or detention"); State v. Patton, 374 So.2d 1211 (1979); and State v. Longlois, 374 So.2d 1208 (La. 1979). Accordingly, the trial court's ruling granting the motion to suppress is reversed insofar as it excludes all testimony and evidence without consideration given to the nature of the pre-detention interactions between Reserve Deputy Pippen and the defendant. Relator's application is otherwise denied.
VGW
JTP
Guidry, J., dissents in part and would deny the writ. I agree with the majority in finding that Reserve Deputy Pippen did not have the authority to detain or arrest the defendant. At no time on the night of the incident did Reserve Deputy Pippen have the authority of a law enforcement officer because he was not on regular or special assignment, or on duty. See Baker Code of Ordinances, Sec. 13.5-34. Further, the detention did not qualify as a valid citizen's arrest because Reserve Deputy Pippen had, at most, a reasonable suspicion that the defendant was in the commission of first-offense DWI - a misdemeanor. See La. R.S. 14:98(B)(1) (prior to 2014 amendment); La. Code Crim. P. art. 214. Thus, Reserve Deputy Pippen acted under color of authority that he lacked, and the detention cannot otherwise be validated under a citizen's arrest analysis. Because the detention was unlawful, I believe the trial court's ruling was correct in granting the motion to suppress as to all of the evidence. See State v. Longlois, 374 So.2d 1208, 1211 (La. 1979). COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT /s/_________
DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT