Opinion

State Of Louisiana v. India Armani Ratliff In Re: Belinda Parker Brown

Court
Louisiana Court of Appeal
Filed
Mar 28, 2024
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 15.7%

The opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA

NO. 2023 KW 0989

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

MARCH 28, 2024

INDIA ARMANI RATLIFF

Brown, for rehearing, 22nd

In Re: Belinda Parker applying

Court, Parish of St. Tammany, No.

Judicial District

3163- M- 2022.

McCLENDON, HESTER, AND MILLER, JJ.

BEFORE:

GRANTED. WRIT GRANTED IN PART AND

REHEARING APPLICATION

powers

DENIED IN PART. A court possesses inherently all

of its jurisdiction and the

necessary for the exercise

lawful It has the duty to require

enforcement of its orders.

that criminal proceedings shall be conducted with dignity and in

expeditious manner and to so control the

an orderly and

justice is done. A court has the power to

proceedings that

See La. Code Crim. P. art. 17. Where the

punish for contempt.

law is silent, the court has the inherent authority to fashion a

the administration of

remedy which will promote orderly

Mims, 329 So. 2d 686, 688 ( La. 1976); State v.

justice. State v.

2d Cir. 1/ 10/ 24) , So. 3d 2024

Dennis, 55, 462 ( La. App. f

WL 105015. However, the Code provides that a court may punish a

person adjudged guilty of contempt of court in connection with a

fine of not more than five hundred

criminal proceeding by a

than six months, or

dollars, or by imprisonment for not more

La. Code Crim. P. art. 25( B). Thus, the law is not

both.

issue. given the facts of this

silent on this Accordingly,

banning Belinda

case, the trial court erred by permanently

its contempt power, from Division E and the

Parker Brown, under

courtrooms, unless subpoenaed as a witness, as a

misdemeanor

or unless specific written authorization from the

party,

presiding judge was obtained.

Therefore, that portion of the ruling permanently banning

Parker from the courtrooms is reversed. In all other

Ms.

respects, the writ application is denied as the record shows the

adduced at the contempt proceedings was sufficient for

evidence

fact to that element of the

a rational trier of conclude every

criminal constructive contempt charge was proven beyond a

reasonable doubt. State in Interest of R. J. S., 493 So. 2d 1199

1986). See also Rogers v. Dickens, 2006- 0898 ( La. App. 1st

La.

Cir. 2/ 9/ 07), 959 So. 2d 940, 945.

Pmc

CHH

Miller, J., concurs.

C) URT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

tEPUT CLERK

C I OF COURT

FOR THE

T COURT

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.