State v. Johnson
1991 WL 272506, 592 So. 2d 818 (1991)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An indigent defendant may be assessed court costs and fees as part of their sentence so long as no additional jail time is imposed as a penalty for default of payment, and collection for non-payment is enforceable through civil remedies.
Facts:
- On July 27, 1990, Deputy Charles Smith observed a motorcycle, driven by Reginald Bardal with Kevin Johnson as a passenger, leave a lounge at a high rate of speed and disregard a stop sign.
- Deputy Smith activated his patrol car's lights and sirens, but the motorcycle continued at a high speed, running a second stop sign before being stopped at Calhoun and Milan Streets.
- When Deputy Smith asked the driver to step off, Kevin Johnson immediately placed his right hand in his right front pocket, causing the officer concern for his safety.
- Officer Smith conducted a pat down search for weapons on both individuals and observed a marijuana cigarette partially extending from Kevin Johnson's right front pants pocket, which he retrieved.
- During the stop, Kevin Johnson was combative, abusive, and made threats against Officer Smith, stating he 'had something for' him 'when he was on the street'.
- Officer Smith detected the smell of alcohol and marijuana on Kevin Johnson, who appeared intoxicated with red, glassy eyes and unsteadiness.
- After being arrested and advised of his rights, Kevin Johnson stated he had found the marijuana cigarette at the Phoenix Lounge and intended to reroll it.
- The retrieved cigarette containing green vegetable matter was subsequently tested by Agent Charles DeLaughter and Milton Dureau, confirming the presence of marijuana.
Procedural Posture:
- Kevin Johnson was charged by bill of information in the trial court (court below) on August 20, 1990, with possession of marijuana, disturbing the peace, and simple assault.
- At his arraignment on October 9, 1990, Kevin Johnson pled not guilty.
- The case proceeded to trial on February 27, 1991, where the trial judge found Kevin Johnson not guilty of disturbing the peace, but guilty of possession of marijuana and simple assault.
- Kevin Johnson was sentenced to serve four months in the Jefferson Parish Correctional Center for possession of marijuana and two months for simple assault, with sentences to run consecutively, plus various court costs and fees, with six months to pay.
- Kevin Johnson appealed his conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fifth 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:
1. Does the assessment of court costs against an indigent defendant violate constitutional rights when the sentence does not impose additional jail time for default of payment? 2. Was there sufficient evidence for the trial judge to find Kevin Johnson guilty of simple assault? 3. Was there sufficient evidence for the trial judge to find Kevin Johnson guilty of possession of marijuana?
Opinions:
Majority - Kliebert, C.J.
1. No, the assessment of court costs against an indigent defendant does not violate constitutional rights when the sentence does not impose additional jail time for default of payment. The court acknowledged that established law, citing cases like State v. Conley, prohibits incarcerating an indigent person solely for inability to pay fines or costs. However, the trial judge in this case did not impose additional jail time in default of payment; rather, Kevin Johnson was granted six months to pay the assessed costs and fees. The court emphasized that the mere imposition of costs on an indigent defendant is not unconstitutional; it is the imposition of additional jail time for default that is impermissible. The court also noted that if Kevin Johnson fails to pay, collection can be enforced as a money judgment in a civil case, per LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 886. 2. Yes, there was sufficient evidence for the trial judge to find Kevin Johnson guilty of simple assault. Applying the standard from State v. Williams, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of every element of the crime charged. Officer Smith's testimony, detailing his concern for safety, Kevin Johnson's 'constantly swinging around' actions, and threats like 'he had something for' him 'when he was on the street,' provided ample evidence for a rational trier of fact to conclude that Kevin Johnson intentionally placed the officer in reasonable apprehension of receiving a battery. 3. Yes, there was sufficient evidence for the trial judge to find Kevin Johnson guilty of possession of marijuana. The conflicting testimony between Officer Smith and Kevin Johnson regarding the marijuana required a credibility determination by the trier of fact (the trial judge). The judge resolved this credibility call in favor of the state. The appellate court found no error in this factual finding, adhering to the principle that such determinations are typically within the province of the trial court and will not be disturbed on appeal unless the record shows a clear error.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the limits of imposing financial penalties on indigent defendants, distinguishing between the permissible assessment of costs and the unconstitutional imposition of jail time for the inability to pay. It underscores that while indigents cannot be imprisoned for non-payment, their financial obligations can still be enforced through civil means. Furthermore, the decision reaffirms the substantial deference appellate courts grant to trial court findings on witness credibility and sufficiency of evidence, particularly when applying the 'rational trier of fact' standard.
