STATE v. BROWN (2026)

Writ granted. Consistent with our prior decision in State v. Diano, 2024-0888 (La. 3/21/25), 403 So.3d 530, 536, we find that any period of time a defendant is incarcerated or subject to correctional supervision pursuant to a conviction that is subsequently reversed and the underlying charges are dismissed shall be included and counted when calculating the “cleansing period” between prior convictions relied upon by the state at a habitual offender adjudication. See La. R.S. 15:529.1(C).

In this case, during the period between the commission of the current offense in 2017 and the previous conviction in 2006, defendant was convicted of another offense in 2011. However, the 2011 conviction was subsequently reversed and the underlying charges were dismissed. See United States v. Brown, 567 F. App'x 272 (5th Cir. 2014); see also State v. Brown, 2022-483, p. 22 (La. App. 3 Cir. 11/16/22), 353 So.3d 919, 935.

Accordingly, we vacate defendant's habitual offender adjudication and remand for a new habitual offender hearing consistent with this opinion. At the hearing, to meet its burden of proof, the state must establish the date on which the defendant's prior term of imprisonment or correctional supervision expired, and show that this date is no more than five years before the date of the current offense. La. R.S. 15:529.1(C)(1)(2019). The actual dates for his federal supervised release and the custodial period related to the violation of that supervised release are critical, but are not apparent based on the record before us. This matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.

SENTENCE VACATED. REMANDED.

PER CURIAM