State of Louisiana v. Sharonda S. Freeman

• Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
• Decided: August 25, 2022
• Docket: 2022-K-0577
• Status: Published

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA * NO. 2022-K-0577

VERSUS * COURT OF APPEAL SHARONDA S. FREEMAN * FOURTH CIRCUIT * STATE OF LOUISIANA *******

APPLICATION FOR WRITS DIRECTED TO CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT ORLEANS PARISH NO. 553-254, SECTION “M1” Honorable Juana M. Lombard, Commissioner ****** Judge Dale N. Atkins ****** (Court composed of Judge Joy Cossich Lobrano, Judge Sandra Cabrina Jenkins, Judge Dale N. Atkins)

Samuel H. Winston Jeigh L. Britton WINSTON BERGERON, LLP 1700 Josephine Street New Orleans, LA 70113

COUNSEL FOR RELATOR, SHARONDA S. FREEMAN

WRIT GRANTED; STAY GRANTED AUGUST 25, 2022 DNA JCL SCJ This is a criminal case involving a charge of simple battery. Relator,

Sharonda S. Freeman (hereinafter “Ms. Freeman”), seeks review of the district

court’s August 18, 2022 order, which granted in part her “Motion to Stay

Imposition of Sentence Pending Appeal” (hereinafter “Motion to Stay”). Relator

also seeks a stay order from this Court. For the following reasons we grant the writ

and the request for a stay.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On July 25, 2022, the district court convicted Ms. Freeman of simple battery

in violation of La. R.S. 14:35.1 Thereafter, on August 11, 2022, the district court

sentenced Ms. Freeman to three-days of imprisonment (sixty-days with fifty-seven

days suspended); six months of active probation; and additional conditions.2 The

1 Louisiana Revised Statutes 14:35 provides:

A. Simple battery is a battery committed without the consent of the victim.

B. Whoever commits a simple battery shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned for not more than six months, or both. 2 According to the subject writ application, which is discussed more fully

throughout this Opinion, Ms. Freeman explains that “[t]he sentence also included special conditions limiting her rights, including anger management counseling,

1 district court ordered that Ms. Freeman’s sentence be imposed on August 19, 2022.

However, Ms. Freeman filed a Motion to Stay on August 18, 2022. That same day,

the district court signed an order, which granted the Motion to Stay in part and

stayed imposition of the three-day imprisonment until August 26, 2022, at 6:00

p.m.

On August 23, 2022, Ms. Freeman filed a “Notice of Intent to Apply for

Supervisory Expedited Writ and Request to Stay Imposition of Sentence,” which

the district court granted that same day. The district court set a return date of

August 24, 2022.

On August 24, 2022, Ms. Freeman (hereinafter “Relator”) filed the subject

writ application with this Court, wherein she seeks expedited supervisory review of

the district court’s August 18, 2022 order. In her subject writ application, Relator

also indicates her intention to file another writ application with this Court, which

will challenge her conviction and sentence.

DISCUSSION

We construe Relator’s subject writ application as a request to this Court to

stay the execution of her three-day imprisonment for simple battery, pending final

determination of the merits of her forthcoming writ application. On the showing

made, we grant Relator’s request and stay the execution of Relator’s three-day

imprisonment, pending the district court setting post-sentencing bail in this matter.

See Ataya v. Suanphairin, 2022-0094 (La. App. 5 Cir. 3/11/22), ___ So.3d ___,

___, 2022 WL 741708; State v. Boudreaux, 475 So.2d 1133, 1133-34 (La. App. 5

Cir. 1985) (citing La. Const. art. 1, § 18 (1974);3 La. C.Cr.P. art. 314.) See also La.

fifty hours of community service, six drug tests, and the prohibition of possessing [or purchasing] a firearm during probation.”

2 C.Cr.P. art. 312(F).4 This stay pertains only to Relator’s three-day imprisonment

and shall have no effect on any other sentences Relator may be concurrently

serving in this matter.

DECREE

For the foregoing reasons, we grant the writ and the request for a stay. This

matter is remanded to the district court for the setting of post-sentencing bail, at

which time the stay granted by this Court shall be automatically lifted.

WRIT GRANTED; STAY GRANTED

3 Louisiana Constitution Article I, § 18(A) states that “[a]fter sentencing and

until final judgment, a person shall be bailable if the sentence actually imposed is five years or less; and the judge may grant bail if the sentence actually imposed exceeds imprisonment for five years.” 4 Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 312(F) provides, in pertinent

part, that “[a]fter conviction and before sentence, bail shall be allowed if the maximum sentence which may be imposed is imprisonment for five years or less.”