State v. West
2000 WL 230213, 754 So.2d 408 (2000)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A letter from a state agency informing a convicted felon of a first-offender pardon and the restoration of citizenship rights does not constitute a valid basis for a mistake of law defense to a charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Such a defense is only valid if based on reliance on a legislative act purporting to make the conduct lawful or a final judgment from a court of last resort.
Facts:
- On June 23, 1992, Mardrick West was convicted of a felony, attempted possession of a controlled dangerous substance.
- After completing his sentence, West received a letter from the Department of Public Safety and Corrections titled 'Verification of First Offender Pardon,' which stated he was fully pardoned and that all rights of citizenship had been restored.
- On February 21, 1999, police stopped a vehicle driven by West's brother, which West owned.
- Police discovered a loaded nine millimeter clip in the vehicle's glove compartment.
- The officers accompanied the brother to his residence, where they found West asleep.
- In plain view, the officers saw a 9 mm handgun between the mattresses of the bed where West was sleeping.
- West admitted that he was the owner of the handgun.
Procedural Posture:
- The State of Louisiana charged Mardrick West by bill of information with possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in the trial court.
- West filed a notice of his intent to use the affirmative defense of mistake of law, based on a pardon letter and prior case law.
- The state filed a motion in the trial court to prohibit West from presenting this defense to the jury.
- The trial court denied the state's motion, permitting the defense to be raised at trial.
- The state (as applicant) sought a supervisory writ from the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit, asking it to review and overturn the trial court's ruling.
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 a letter from the Department of Public Safety and Corrections informing a convicted felon that his 'rights of citizenship' have been restored provide a valid basis for an affirmative defense of mistake of law to a charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon under LSA-R.S. 14:17?
Opinions:
Majority - Williams, J.
No. A letter from the Department of Public Safety and Corrections restoring a convicted felon's rights of citizenship does not provide a valid basis for a mistake of law defense. The court reasoned that Louisiana's mistake of law defense, codified in LSA-R.S. 14:17, is exceptionally narrow. It is only applicable when an offender reasonably relies on either (1) a legislative act repealing a criminal provision or purporting to make the conduct lawful, or (2) a final judgment from a competent court of last resort declaring the law unconstitutional. The pardon letter from the Department of Corrections is neither a legislative act nor a court judgment. Citing Louisiana Supreme Court precedent in State v. Amos and State v. Wiggins, the court held that an automatic first-offender pardon restores general rights of citizenship but does not erase the status of being a convicted felon for the purposes of the specific firearm prohibition in LSA-R.S. 14:95.1. Therefore, West's reliance on his own interpretation of the agency letter constituted ignorance of the law, which is not a defense.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the very limited nature of the mistake of law defense in Louisiana, clarifying that it cannot be based on communications from administrative agencies. It solidifies the legal principle that a general restoration of civil rights through a pardon does not override specific statutory prohibitions, such as the ban on felons possessing firearms. By explicitly declining to follow the contrary reasoning in State v. Riser, the court eliminated a potential defense for individuals in similar situations, ensuring that only reliance on the legislature or the highest courts can excuse criminal conduct under a mistake of law theory.
