Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC

Expungements in Louisiana

2016-01-29T16:58:39Z

Criminal convictions, and arrests that do not result in conviction, have many collateral consequences and few things create barriers to obtaining a good job like a criminal record.

A record of arrest or conviction that is expunged in Louisiana is not destroyed. It becomes confidential, but remains available for use by law enforcement agencies, criminal justice agencies, and other statutorily defined agencies.

In 2014, the Louisiana Legislature recognized that “the inability to obtain an expungement can prevent certain individuals from obtaining gainful employment.” Louisiana. Code of Criminal Procedure Article 971(4). As a result, the Legislature enacted a series of revised and consolidated expungement statutes under Title XXXIV of the Criminal Code allowing for expungement of a broad range of both misdemeanors and felonies under certain circumstances.

The Legislature’s stated intent is to “provide opportunities to break the cycle of criminal recidivism, increase public safety, and assist the growing population of criminal offenders reentering the community to establish a self-sustaining life through opportunities in employment.” Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 971(6).

Records that may be expunged:

Records of an arrest that did not result in a conviction:

A person may file a motion to expunge a record of his arrest for a felony or misdemeanor offense that did not result in a conviction if any of the following apply:

(1) The person was not prosecuted for the offense for which he was arrested, and the limitations on the institution of prosecution have barred the prosecution for that offense.

(2) The district attorney for any reason declined to prosecute any offense arising out of that arrest.

(3) Prosecution was instituted and such proceedings have been finally disposed of by dismissal, sustaining of a motion to quash, or acquittal.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 976A.

Records of an arrest and conviction of a misdemeanor offense:

A person may file a motion to expunge his record of arrest and conviction of a misdemeanor offense if either of the following apply:

(1) The conviction was set aside and the prosecution was dismissed pursuant to Article 894(B) of this Code.

(2) More than 5 years have elapsed since the person completed any sentence, deferred adjudication, or period of probation or parole, and the person has not been convicted of any felony offense during the 5-year period, and has no felony charge pending against him.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 977A.

Records of an arrest and conviction of a felony offense:

A person may file a motion to expunge his record of arrest and conviction of a felony offense if either of the following apply:

(1) The conviction was set aside and the prosecution was dismissed pursuant to Article 893(E) of this Code.

(2) More than 10 years have elapsed since the person completed any sentence, deferred adjudication, or period of probation or parole based on the felony conviction, and the person has not been convicted of any other criminal offense during the 10-year period, and has no criminal charge pending against him.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 978A.

Any person who was convicted of carnal knowledge of a juvenile (R.S. 14:80) prior to August 15, 2001, is eligible for an expungement pursuant to the provisions of this Title if the offense for which the offender was convicted would be defined as misdemeanor carnal knowledge of a juvenile (R.S. 14:80.1) had the offender been convicted on or after August 15, 2001.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 978B(2)(b).

Records of an arrest for a felony when conviction is for a misdemeanor:

A person may file an interim motion to expunge a felony arrest from his criminal history when that original arrest results in a conviction for a misdemeanor. In such cases, only the felony arrest may be expunged.

An interim motion to expunge shall not be subject to the time limitations of 5 or 10 years for misdemeanor or felony expungements and there shall be no restriction on the number of interim expungements which may be granted.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 985.1A & D.

Expungement of certain controlled dangerous substance convictions:

Convictions for the following violations of the Controlled Dangerous Substances Law may be expunged under the following circumstances:

(1) A conviction for possession of a controlled dangerous substance as provided for in R.S. 40:966(C), 967(C), or 969(C), or 970(C).

(2) A conviction for possession of a controlled dangerous substance with the intent to distribute.

(3) A conviction for a violation of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law which is punishable by a term of imprisonment of not more than 5 years.

(4) A conviction for a violation of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law which may be expunged pursuant to Article 893(E).

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 978B(3).

Limitations on expungement:

Arrests that did not result in conviction:

No person arrested for a violation of R.S. 14:98 (operating a vehicle while intoxicated) or a parish or municipal ordinance that prohibits operating a vehicle while intoxicated, impaired, or while under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or any controlled dangerous substance, and placed by the prosecuting authority into a pretrial diversion program, shall be entitled to an expungement of the record until 5 years have elapsed since the date of arrest for that offense.

Louisiana. Code of Criminal Procedure Article 976B.

Limitations on expungement of misdemeanor convictions:

No person shall be entitled to expungement of a record under any of the following circumstances:

(1) The misdemeanor conviction arose from circumstances involving or is the result of an arrest for a sex offense as defined in R.S. 15:541, except that an interim expungement shall be available.

(2) The misdemeanor conviction was for domestic abuse battery.

(3) The misdemeanor conviction was for stalking (R.S. 14:40.2).

Expungement of a record of arrest and conviction of a misdemeanor offense shall occur only once with respect to any person during a 5-year period, unless the person was sentenced pursuant to Article 894(B).

Expungement of a record of arrest and conviction of a misdemeanor offense of operating a vehicle while intoxicated shall occur only once with respect to any person during a 10-year period.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 977C & D.

Limitations on expungement of felony convictions:

No expungement shall be granted nor shall a person be permitted to file a motion to expunge the record of arrest and conviction of a felony offense if the person was convicted of the commission or attempted commission of any of the following offenses:

(1) A crime of violence as defined by or enumerated in R.S. 14:2(B).

(2)(a) A sex offense or a criminal offense against a victim who is a minor as each term is defined in R.S. 15:541, or any offense which occurred prior to June 18, 1992, that would be defined as a sex offense or a criminal offense against a victim who is a minor had it occurred on or after June 18, 1992 (subject to Article 893).

(3) A violation of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law (with some exceptions).

(4) The conviction was for domestic abuse battery.

Expungement of a record of arrest and conviction of a felony offense shall occur only once with respect to any person during a 15-year period.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 978B & D.

Expungement by redaction of records with references to multiple individuals:

If a record includes the name of more than 1 individual and 1 or more of the individuals is entitled to an expungement of an arrest or conviction, any individual entitled to an expungement may petition the court to have records related to the arrest or conviction of the individual expunged by redaction.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 985.

The costs for filing a motion for expungement begin at around $500. They increase for varying reasons, including whether the conviction was for driving while intoxicated. All motions for expungement must be filed on forms promulgated by the Legislature and (sometimes) downloadable from the websites for the various clerks of court. All costs paid to the court are non-refundable and if a motion is rejected for any reason, those fees are not recoverable, nor can the filer correct his application and re-file without having to pay the costs again.

If you are curious about your eligibility for an expungement, please contact our office for a consultation at 318-227-1460.

The post Expungements in Louisiana appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.

Mission, Vision & Tactics

2016-12-31T18:56:50Z

The Vision

To be the Premier Law Firm in our community for defending the lives, liberty and property of the people that seek our help.

The Mission

Always work to make a positive difference in out Client’s lives.

The Tactics

Engage with, listen to, and believe in our clients. Understand their needs and goals. Fight inside and outside the courtroom to obtain the best outcome for our Clients

The post Mission, Vision & Tactics appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.

Are We The Right Lawyers for You?

2015-12-15T22:33:24Z

Elton Richey

It depends. We are committed to providing quality, personal representation. So we don’t accept every case. And while we cannot promise any given outcome, we believe our work can, and should make a positive difference in our clients’ lives.

The only way to really know whether we are the right lawyers for you is for you to talk to us.

Click Here to find out about setting up a consultation.

Call 318-227-1460 to arrange for a confidential consultation with one of our attorneys.

The post Are We The Right Lawyers for You? appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.

Join Our Team

2015-12-15T22:37:15Z

If people like John Adams, Clarence Darrow, Earl Warren, Thurgood Marshall, Sandra Day O’Connor, and Sonia Sotomayor inspire you, . . . .
Then we might need to talk.
Explore our Team

The post Join Our Team appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.

New Law Creates Crime of “Nonconsensual Disclosure of Private Image”

2015-10-03T04:03:45Z

Attorney Sarah Giglio

One of the most important legislative updates from the 2015 session in Louisiana is the creation of La. R.S. 14:283.2, which defines and punishes “nonconsensual disclosure of a private image.”

As a result of this legislation, it is a felony for a person to “intentionally disclose an image of another person who is seventeen years of age or older, who is identifiable from the image or information displayed in connection with the image, and whose intimate parts are exposed in whole or in part.” Additionally, the person doing the disclosing has to have gotten it under circumstances under which a reasonable person would understand that the image was supposed to remain private, and that person knew or should have known that the person in the image did not consent to the disclosure of the image. Finally, the person who discloses the image must have the intent to harass or cause emotional distress to the person in the image.

Now the legislature did of course write in exceptions for criminal justice agencies, and for when the person voluntarily or knowingly exposed themselves in public, or when such images are “related to a matter of public interest, public concern,” etc.

What is the punishment for this crime? As I mentioned above, it is a felony, and it is punishable by up to two years in prison, a fine of up to $10,000 or both.

And finally, how does this affect you? Well, we now live in a world in which “sexting” is very prominent, and as a result there are more pictures floating around of people whose “intimate parts are exposed in whole or in part.” We hear plenty of stories of people who think a good way to get back at the person who broke their heart, embarrass the person who embarrassed them, or who otherwise experienced an unpleasant breakup think it would be funny to disclose pictures like this. Don’t do it! The legislature has now made the decision for us that this is NOT a good decision, and could result in very serious consequences. If you are arrested for this or contacted by a detective regarding a crime of this or a similar nature, you need to seek legal advice.

The post New Law Creates Crime of “Nonconsensual Disclosure of Private Image” appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.

Gun Rights in Louisiana

2015-09-11T23:33:11Z

Katherine Gilmer

In 2012, the citizens of the State of Louisiana amended the state constitution to provide emphatically that the right to bear arms is fundamental “and shall not be infringed,” and further subjected any restrictions placed on this right to strict scrutiny.

In 2014, the Legislature passed Act 195, which enacted La. R.S. 14:95.10 and 46:2136.3. Each of these statutes limited the rights of individuals to possess guns in particular circumstances. La. R.S. 14:95.10 restricted those convicted of Domestic Abuse Battery (La. R.S. 14:35.3) from possessing a firearm or carrying a concealed weapon. Firearm is defined in the statute as “any pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun, machine gun, submachine gun, black powder weapon, or assault rifle which is designed to fire or is capable of firing fixed cartridge ammunition or from which a shot or projectile is discharged by an explosive.” “Weapon,” strangely, is not defined in the statute. La. R.S. 46:2136.3 involves the possession of weapons by individuals against whom protective orders have been issued.

The statute makes possession or carrying of such a firearm a felony punishable by a minimum sentence of one year and up to five years (potentially at hard labor) and a fine of not less than $500 nor more than $1,000; and criminalizes the possession of a firearm for ten years from the date of completion of sentence, probation, parole, or suspension of sentence for the underlying offense.

In July of this year, the legislature passed Act 440, which extended the reach of the Domestic Abuse Battery statute to criminalize the intentional use of force or violence committed by one household member or family member upon the person of another household member or family member. (The italicized language was added by Act 440.)

A “household member” is defined as “any person of the opposite sex presently or formerly living in the same residence with the offender as a spouse, whether married or not, or any child presently or formerly living in the same residence with the offender, or any child of the offender regardless of where the child resides.” A “family member” “means spouses, former spouses, parents, children, stepparents, stepchildren, foster parents, and foster children.”

Important to note, also, is the fact that the legislature removed a former limitation on the statute’s application. Prior to this year, if a defendant had not resided with the complainant within five years, the crime of Domestic Abuse Battery did not apply (a battery could still have been committed, but that’s a blog for another day). Now, there is no limitation on the time since the cohabitation.

Thus, despite a state constitutional amendment providing that gun ownership is a fundamental right, the Louisiana legislature has passed legislation in the intervening years broadening the circumstances under which gun ownership can be criminalized or restricted.

(It should be noted that the Federal government has had such restrictions in place for many years (see 18 USCA §922(g)(9)).)

If you or someone you know is facing charges of Domestic Abuse Battery, seek legal advice immediately so that you don’t place your fundamental rights at risk.

The post Gun Rights in Louisiana appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.

Louisiana Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Calls for Decriminalization of Marijuana Use

2014-03-28T19:57:01Z

Louisiana Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers

The Board of Directors of the Louisiana Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers has adopted a policy denouncing the criminalization of “responsible consumption of marijuana by adults in private.” The full text of the policy statement is as follows:

We believe that marijuana prohibition financially burdens taxpayers, encroaches upon civil liberties, engenders disrespect for the law, and disproportionately impacts students, lower income classes, African Americans, and other ethnic minorities who bear the brunt of cannabis arrests and prosecutions. The responsible consumption of marijuana by adults in private should not be defined as criminal behavior deserving of arrest, potential jail time, a criminal record, and the lifelong stigma that accompanies it. Criminalizing marijuana is a disproportionate response to what, at worst, is a health issue, not a criminal justice issue.

To view the official press release, click here.

The post Louisiana Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Calls for Decriminalization of Marijuana Use appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.

Suit Filed Alleging Mansfield Police Officer Fabricated Evidence In Murder Case

2014-03-26T11:57:17Z

Chis Hatch

Here is the full text, and a link to the latest Shreveport Times coverage by Vicki Wellborn of the suit filed on behalf of our client Terrence Glaster, who was falsely accused of murder by a Mansfield Police officer. Mr. Glaster is represented by Senior Associate Chris Hatch.

Mansfield officer accused of fabricating evidence in murder probe

A Mansfield man twice-arrested for a homicide has filed suit in federal court, claiming the arresting officer fabricated evidence and lied during court proceeding.

Terrance Glaster states as a result of his false arrest and incarceration he’s suffered damage to his reputation, loss of income and incurred attorney fees and expenses. He’s seeking unspecified monetary compensation for the damages he said he endured with violations of his constitution, civil and statutory rights.

Attorney Christopher Hatch filed the lawsuit late Friday, naming the city of Mansfield, Mansfield Police Department, Police Chief Gary Hobbs and Sgt. Billy Locke as defendants. Hobbs and Locke are named individually and in their official capacities.

“At this time, I have not been served,” Mayor Curtis McCoy said of the lawsuit. “Through conversation, I have heard about it, but no one has served papers at City Hall so … I can’t comment on it at this time.”

Glaster, 31, has been charged on two separate occasions with the Dec. 24, 2012 shooting death of LaDerrick Hadnott, 29, of Mansfield. Hadnott was shot in the head in a house on Topeka Street he shared with a roommate.

Glaster was first arrested Jan. 25, 2013 and charged in Hadnott’s murder. The charge was dropped after a grand jury on Feb. 13, 2013 declined to indict him.

His second arrest was on March 21, 2013. Glaster was jailed until May 28, when he was released on a $200,000 bond. On Nov. 14, the DeSoto District Attorney’s office dismissed the second-degree murder charge against Glaster.

No arrest has been made in Hadnott’s murder. Hadnott’s death was the first homicide investigation for Locke. Glaster accuses the sergeant of not conducting a thorough forensic investigation nor seeking assistance from another agency with more investigative resources.

Glaster provided Locke with an alibi and the names and contact numbers for those he was with the night Hadnott was killed. Locke did not follow up on Glaster’s information, nor did he take action on information supplied by others, including a known police informant, who identified another man involved in a stabbing incident with Hadnott 23 days prior to his death, as a suspect, the lawsuit states.

The informant, identified in the lawsuit as Anthony Jackson, told Locke he was less than 10 feet from Hadnott’s house when he saw the shooter run out with a “black nine millimeter.” Jackson gave other, sometimes conflicting, statements.

“Despite the patent unreliability of Jackson’s uncorroborated statement, and despite the fact that Jackson actually implicated an entirely different person for the shooting (the man who Hadnott had stabbed), plaintiff was arrested and charged with the murder of Hadnott on January 25, 2013, based entirely on Jackson’s statement,” the lawsuit states.

Ten days after Glaster was first released from custody, a police informant reportedly contacted Locke to say he could get a confession from Glaster. In Locke’s written report he states he met with the informant, gave him a recording device, followed him to a house on Grove Street where Glaster was standing in the yard and watched Glaster get into the informant’s vehicle. Locke “loosened surveillance” and met with the informant 30 minutes later to retrieve the recording.

Defense witnesses who listened to the recording identified Makeus Washington, a felon with pending criminal charges as the informant. The two-minute recording consists of a male entering Washington’s vehicle, “briefly and spontaneously” admitting to Hadnott’s murder then exiting.

“The male who is purported to have admitted to the shooting on the recording is not Terrance Glaster,” the lawsuits states.

The “faked” recording was discussed during an in-chambers conference involving District Judge Charles Adams and an assistant district attorney. And during a bench conference about Glaster’s bond reduction, Lock also repeatedly denied identifying Washington to the defense counsel. However, a recording of the conversation between Locke and the attorney was given to the judge and district attorney.

“Sgt. Locke knowingly and maliciously misled both the assistant district attorney and the court regarding his disclosure of the identity of the informant in order to preserve the strength of his case against Glaster,” the lawsuit states.

Certified cellular telephone records obtained by defense counsel, via subpoena from Washington’s cell phone provider, show a multitude of calls between Washington and Locke during the same date and time periods referenced in Locke’s report. The same cellular telephone records reveal that there were no calls or text messages between Washington’s phone and any phone associated with or used by Glaster on the day Locke said the recording was made.

During a preliminary examination on July 17, Locke admitted he did not actually follow the informant all the way to the Grove Street house where Glaster was supposedly standing. Instead, he stopped at an intersection 1,000 feet away. Additionally, Locke admitted he only saw someone he thought “resembled” Glaster, but he did not know whether Glaster was actually the man who was standing in front of the house and got into Washington’s vehicle.

The grand jury indictment against Glaster was based on Locke’s “false testimony,” the lawsuit states. Because of Locke’s conduct, Glaster was deprived of his constitutional rights against unlawful imprisonment, false arrest and malicious prosecution, the document further states. Also noted is the potential of Glaster to have been convicted and jailed for life for a crime based on “false evidence.”

United States District Court, Shreveport

The lawsuit accuses the city, police department, Hobbs and Locke of providing inadequate resources in homicide investigations, inadequate training and supervision, inadequate training of officers in the training and use of paid informants, inadequate training of officers on their constitutional duty to testify truthfully without personal malice and failing to take disciplinary action against officers who are known to have engaged in misconduct.

The post Suit Filed Alleging Mansfield Police Officer Fabricated Evidence In Murder Case appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.

Desoto Parish Man Freed after Murder Charges Dismissed

2014-02-07T15:21:31Z

Chris Hatch

Here is the full text, and a link to the latest Shreveport Times coverage by Vicki Wellborn of the dismissal of charges against our client Terrence Glaster, who was falsely accused of murder last Christmas. Mr. Glaster is represented by Senior Associate Chris Hatch.

MANSFIELD — The shooting death of a Mansfield man almost a year ago remains unsolved. And a criminal charge against an alleged shooter has been dismissed for a second time. Last month, DeSoto District Judge Robert Burgess formally dismissed an indictment handed up in March that accused Terrence Glaster, 31, of second-degree murder in the slaying Dec. 24 of LaDerrick Hadnott. Court records show no reason for the dismissal.

The indictment marked the second time Glaster had been accused of Hadnott’s death. He was arrested in January after Mansfield police developed him as a suspect. A grand jury in February declined to indict him, so he was freed.The panel convened the next month after Mansfield police generated more information about Hadnott’s death. Hadnott was discovered dead of a single gunshot to the head in a house on Topeka Street that he shared with a roommate.

Glaster’s attorney, Christopher Hatch, raised questions about the investigation and filed a pretrial motion in September seeking disclosure of grand jury testimony, particularly that of investigator Billy Locke. Hatch’s motion takes issue with information Locke provided at a previous hearing during which the detective said he saw or observed Glaster in front of a Grove Street house where a cooperating witness obtained a recording that was presented to the grand jury. “This evidence would be favorable to the defendant for impeachment purposes because it would be inconsistent with Locke’s testimony at the (preliminary examination) held on July 17, 2013, that he did not, in fact, actually see a person that he knew to be Mr. Glaster in front the Grove Street residence,” Hatch’s motion says.

Click here to go to Viki Wellborn’s Shreveport Time Special Projects Report

Records do not indicate the court ruled on Hatch’s motion since evidence sharing in the discovery phase was ongoing just prior to the decision by the DeSoto district attorney’s office to dismiss the indictment. Mansfield Police Chief Gary Hobbs said the investigation into Hadnott’s death is ongoing.

The post Desoto Parish Man Freed after Murder Charges Dismissed appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.

First Annual Halloween Costume Contest!

2014-02-07T15:21:38Z

We are a little unfocused this morning on our way to Court…

Everyone lining up for the Big First Annual Halloween Costume Contest

Hey! You can’t hide in the Back!

Who is that mysterious woman in the Dark Glasses?

Does she work for us?

What a Crew! that’s enough to scare any judge!

The post First Annual Halloween Costume Contest! appeared first on Shreveport-Bossier | Criminal Defense & Personal Injury Law | Elton B. Richey & Associates, LLC.