STATE IN INTEREST OF v. << (2020)

Writ application denied.

Louisiana Children's Code article 877 provides time limitations within which the state must adjudicate juvenile delinquency matters. The time limits in Article 877 are mandatory and may not be extended absent a showing of good cause. State in the Interest of R.D.C., Jr., 93-1865 (La. 2/28/94), 632 So.2d 745, 749; State ex rel J.B. and G.M., 03-0587 (La. App. 4 Cir. 12/10/03), 863 So.2d 669. Moreover, “it is incumbent upon the state to make a showing of good cause and obtain an extension before the period has run.” Id. (emphasis in original).

In this case, the time limitation for adjudication expired several weeks before the juvenile court found good cause to extend the time limit for prosecution. Furthermore, the court's belated good-cause ruling was not prompted by any timely action by the state, but rather by defendant's Motion to Dismiss Petition for Failure to Timely Prosecute, filed approximately a week after the time limit for trial had already expired. I also note the juvenile court found good cause to retroactively extend the Article 877 adjudication deadline primarily based on its own failure to timely re-allot defendant's case after the assigned judge recused himself.

Based on these facts, I find the juvenile court failed to make a timely finding of good cause to extend the time limitation, and the court abused its discretion in denying defendant's Motion to Dismiss.

The issue presented to this Court in this matter was close, generating considerable discussion and a thoughtful dissent by our Chief Justice. However, notwithstanding the writ denial, I write separately to specifically note that the requisite standard for delay in prosecution was met here and thus, the trial court correctly denied the Petition for Failure to Timely Prosecute.

Article 877 of the Louisiana Children's Code provides the time limitations within which the state must adjudicate juvenile delinquency matters, with section (D) stating that for “good cause,” the court may extend those time periods. The fourteen year-old juvenile in this matter is charged with serious offenses, including armed robbery, illegal possession of a handgun by a juvenile, two counts of resisting an officer, and misrepresentation during booking. Although there was a delay in the adjudication of this juvenile, the circumstances surrounding the delay constitute “good cause” within the meaning of the statute. Specifically, the previous trial judge in this matter recused himself due to both defense counsel and the prosecutor being candidates in the upcoming election against that judge; there was an administrative delay in appointing a replacement judge and the appointment of an ad hoc judge; Louisiana experienced two major weather events (hurricanes) during the relevant time frame, and we continue to be embroiled in an historical global pandemic.

As a result, under a totality of these extremely unique circumstances, I agree with the trial court and a majority of the court of appeal as to the denial of the juvenile's Motion to Dismiss Petition for Failure to Timely Prosecute, and therefore concur with the Court's decision to deny this writ application.

Johnson, C.J., would grant and assigns reasons. Weimer, J., would grant and docket. Crichton, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons. Genovese, J., would grant.