State v. Billiot

104 So. 3d 113, 2012 La.App. 1 Cir. 0174, 2012 WL 4320239, 2012 La. App. LEXIS 1182
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedSeptember 21, 2012
DocketNo. 2012 CA 0174
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 104 So. 3d 113 (State v. Billiot) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Billiot, 104 So. 3d 113, 2012 La.App. 1 Cir. 0174, 2012 WL 4320239, 2012 La. App. LEXIS 1182 (La. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

PETTIGREW, J.

|2In this case, the State of Louisiana, through the Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Office of State Police, Bureau of Criminal Identification and Information (“State”), appeals from the trial court’s judgment ordering that the defendant, Timothy E. Billiot, be released from any further sex offender registration requirements, as provided in La. R.S. 15:544(D)(1). For the reasons set forth below, we reverse the trial court’s judgment and remand for further proceedings.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On August 20, 2001, Mr. Billiot entered a plea of nolo contendere to molestation of a juvenile (La. R.S. 14:81.2). Following a motion for modification of sentence, Mr. Billiot was sentenced to eight (8) years, with all but thirty (30) months suspended, with credit for time served. Once Mr. Billiot was released from incarceration, he was to be placed on supervised probation for five (5) years, with special conditions.

On April 29, 2011, Mr. Billiot filed a “Petition for Reduction of Time Period for Sex Offender Registration.” In said petition, Mr. Billiot alleged that he had satisfactorily completed his probationary period on or about June 21, 2008, and that he had not been convicted of any other offense since the date of his conviction in the original matter. He further asserted that he was not required by the trial court to submit to the sex offender registration requirements at the time of his sentencing, thus La. R.S. 15:544 did not apply to him.

Following a hearing on September 6, 2011, at which time there was no objection by the assistant district attorney, the trial court rendered judgment in favor of Mr. Billiot, relieving him of the duty to register as a sex offender. The trial court, essentially found that although the amendments [115]*115to La. R.S. 15:544 subsequent to Mr. Billi-ot’s conviction are to be applied retroactively, they only applied to persons who were previously required to register. The trial court went on to say at the time Mr. Billiot entered his guilty plea, molestation of a juvenile was not an offense that required registration, and therefore, he had satisfied, from a registration standpoint, any and all requirements of La. R.S. 15:544. Is A judgment in accordance with the trial court’s findings was signed on September 15, 2011. It is from this judgment that the State1 has appealed, assigning error to the trial court’s judgment. The sole issue presented for our review in this appeal is whether La. R.S. 15:544(D)(1) allows a sex offender who is required to register for twenty-five (25) years to be relieved of his registration and notification requirements.

LAW AND ANALYSIS

Mr. Billiot’s Obligation to Register as a Sex Offender

The State argues on appeal that, contrary to the trial court’s assertion, a violation of La. R.S. 14:81.2 (molestation of a juvenile) “has constituted a ‘sex offense’ that requires registration and notification from the inception of Louisiana’s sex offender registration and notification laws.” We agree.

Louisiana’s sex offender registration and notification provisions (commonly referred to as “Megan’s Law”)2 were originally enacted in 1992 and are found in La. R.S. 15:540, et seq. See 1992 La. Acts, No. 388, § 1. At that time, La. R.S. 15:542(A) provided “[a]ny adult residing in this state who has pled guilty or has been convicted of any sex offense shall register with the sheriff of the parish of the person’s residence.” Moreover, “sex offense” for the purpose of registration and notification was defined in La. R.S. 15:542(E) as “a violation of any provision of Subpart C of Part II, Subpart B of Part IV, or Subpart A(l) or A(4) of Part V, of Chapter 1 of Title 14 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950.” At that time, La. R.S. 14:81.2 (molestation of a juvenile) constituted a “sex offense” as defined by La. R.S. 15:542(E) as it was included in hSubpart A(l) of Part V, of Chapter 1 of Title 14 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950.

Moreover, when Mr. Billiot was convicted on August 20, 2001, La. R.S. 15:542(A) provided that “[a]ny adult residing in this state who has pled guilty to, has been convicted of, or where adjudication has been deferred or withheld for the perpe[116]*116tration or attempted perpetration of any sex offense ... shall register with the sheriff of the parish of the person’s residence.” At the time of Mr. Billiot’s conviction, “sex offense” for the purposes of registration and notification included a conviction for a violation of La. R.S. 14:81.2 (molestation of a juvenile). With regard to the duty to register at the time of Mr. Billiot’s conviction, Mr. Billiot was required to register and give notice until ten years after release from incarceration. See La. R.S. 15:544(A)3 (prior to amendment by 2007 La. Acts, No. 460, § 2).

According to the record, Mr. Billiot was incarcerated for his conviction for molestation of a juvenile, and once released, was placed on five (5) years supervised probation. Mr. Billiot executed a form entitled “Conditions of Probation” on June 30, 2003, indicating that he was to begin paying supervision fees on August 1, 2003. Moreover, in the petition at issue in the instant case, Mr. Billiot notes that he satisfactorily completed his probationary period on or about June 21, 2008. Thus, it would appear that Mr. Billiot was released from incarceration some five years before that, or around the time that he executed the conditions of his probation in June 2003. Therefore, had Mr. Billiot initially registered in June 2003 as he was required to do by ^statute, his obligation to register would not have expired for ten (10) years (assuming he successfully complied with all statutory requirements).

in 2007, the Louisiana legislature amended La. R.S. 15:541, et seq., through 2007 La. Acts, No. 460 § 2. The changes became effective January 1, 2008, and, with regard to the retroactivity of the registration requirements of the provisions of the Act, § 6 provided as follows:

The provisions of this Act shall apply to all persons convicted of a sex offense or a criminal offense against a victim who is a minor, as defined in R.S. 15:541, regardless of the date of conviction, with the exception of those persons required to register under previous provisions of law whose obligations to register have been fulfilled and extinguished by operation of law. Any person under an obligation to register as of the effective date of this Act shall comply with the requirements contained in this Act and shall be given credit for having fulfilled their obligations to register for the length of time equal to their previous registration in compliance with law.

Effective January 1, 2008, La. R.S. 15:542 provided, in pertinent part, as follows:

A. The following persons shall be required to register and provide notification as a sex offender or child predator in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter:
(1) Any adult residing in this state who has pled guilty to, has been convicted of, or where adjudication has been deferred or withheld for the perpetra[117]*117tion or attempted perpetration of, or any conspiracy to commit either of the following:
(a) A sex offense as defined in R.S.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
104 So. 3d 113, 2012 La.App. 1 Cir. 0174, 2012 WL 4320239, 2012 La. App. LEXIS 1182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-billiot-lactapp-2012.