State v. Converse
529 So.2d 459, 1988 WL 66207 (1988)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A statute defining prison contraband is constitutional when it provides a specific list of prohibited items, even if it allows the officer in charge to authorize possession of those items, because the legislature defines the crime, and the official's role is merely administrative.
Facts:
- Roland Converse was an inmate at the Assumption Parish Detention Center.
- Converse was the sole occupant of his cell.
- During a routine search of Converse's cell, deputies discovered two lengths of wire hidden under his mattress.
- Deputies also found a disposable razor and a separate straight-edged razor blade taped to the toilet in his cell.
- Posted institutional rules prohibited inmates from possessing objects with any kind of metal.
- Converse claimed that a deputy had given him a razor, though he offered no testimony to show this was done through official channels.
Procedural Posture:
- The State of Louisiana charged Roland Converse by bill of information with possession of contraband in a penal institution.
- Converse filed a motion to quash the bill of information, arguing the controlling statute was unconstitutional.
- The trial court denied the motion to quash.
- The case was tried before a jury, which returned a verdict of guilty as charged.
- The trial court sentenced Converse to the maximum of five years at hard labor.
- Converse, as appellant, appealed his conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does La.R.S. 14:402 C, which defines contraband for parish jails and allows the officer in charge to authorize items that would otherwise be contraband, constitute an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge Lottinger
No. The statute does not constitute an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. The court distinguished this case from State v. Taylor, where a different section of the statute (applying to state prisons) was struck down for granting officials 'unfettered discretion' to define contraband. In contrast, La.R.S. 14:402 C provides a specific list of contraband items. Citing State v. Morgan, the court reasoned that the provision allowing the officer in charge to authorize items is a permissible administrative function, not a legislative one. The legislature itself defined the crime as possession without authorization; if authority is granted, no crime occurs, and if it is not granted, the legislative prohibition applies. The court also found the evidence of constructive possession was sufficient, as the items were hidden in a cell occupied only by Converse, implying guilty knowledge.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the legal distinction between an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power and a permissible grant of administrative discretion. By upholding a statute that specifies prohibited acts but allows an official to grant exceptions, the court provides a clear framework for drafting constitutional regulations in administrative contexts like penal institutions. The case clarifies that as long as the legislature defines the core of the offense, it can delegate the authority to manage exceptions based on situational needs, such as institutional security. This precedent helps define the boundaries of the non-delegation doctrine in Louisiana.
