State Of Louisiana VS Joelle Watkins and $5,357.00 U.S. Currency and 2 Hand Rolled Cigars, Weighing 1.8 Grams of Suspected Marijuana, 6.6 Grams of Suspected Marijuana and 4 Tablets of Klonapin
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2008 CA 0688 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS JOELLE WATKINS AND 5 357 00 U S CURRENCY AND 2 HAND ROLLED CIGARS WEIGHING 1 8 GRAMS OF SUSPECTED MARIJUANA 6 6 GRAMS OF SUSPECTED MARIJUANA AND 4 TABLETS OF KLONAPIN Judgment Rendered iscs Kk 11 J pealed SEP 2 3 2008 from the Thirty second Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of Terrebonne State of Louisiana Docket Number 149 296 Honorable David W Arceneaux Ellen Daigle Doskey Assistant District Attorney Judge I Counsel for Plaintiff Appellant State of Louisiana Houma LA Douglas H Counsel for Defendantl Appellee Greenburg Houma LA Joelle Watkins I BEFORE The petition was KUHN GUIDRY AND GAIDRY JJ subsequently supplemented and amended to reflect the correct amount or 5 3Z7 00 GUIDRY J The State of Louisiana appeals a rendered judgment against it in the forfeiture action it filed against the defendant Joelle Watkins pursuant Seizure and Controlled Dangerous Substances Property Forfeiture 1989 La defendant RS 40 2601 et seq 5 377 00 that property namely s Forfeiture Act the defendant Joelle Watkins incidental trial court monies of court to return to together with judicial court trial awarding September court 8 erred in interest earned State judgment of the The 40 2611 the defendant the interest to carry its and ordered the State 5 377 00 that had been seized 8 from the date of September Emphasis court costs assigns error 2006 until 2006 until added paid According to the monies seized to the trial court statute the State award of s argument the only requires payment of during the forfeiture s trial payment of judicial interest from the because the doing so on the defendant the s evidentiary primary issue raised by the State in its appeal is whether the erred in date of seized from the person of was to an arrest RS La to 750 00 in attorney fees and all The Act of seeking the forfeiture of found that the State had failed proof pursuant immediately paid the denied the forfeiture and dismissed the seizure ofthe defendant The trial burden to Additionally 750 00 in the attorney fees in favor of the defendant The defendant has answered the appeal seeking an additional award of attorney fees and expenses incurred in the defense of this appeal and also that the State be assessed all costs ofthe appeal AWARD OF JUDICIAL INTEREST Under the Forfeiture Act La RS 40 2601 be used in any property used or facilitate conduct in violation of La RS intended to 40 961 the Louisiana Uniform Controlled manner to et seq 2 Dangerous Substances Law is subject forfeiture upon the commission of an to confinement for RS 40 2603 1 more than one and 2604 2 ground year under La on the State presented for the belief that the transactions State v property punishable by See La et seq to meet show probable be sufficient to cause form connected with was La 1993 In this its burden and that case finding for the reasonable a illegal drug 1 15 56 00 623 So 2d 114 La Cash Totalling found that the State failed omission RS 40 961 to must writ denied 629 So 2d 401 Cir 1993 or b The initial burden is forfeiture and the evidence act App the trial has not 1 sl court been appealed only portion of the trial The ordered the State and act to pay does to return attorney not fees provide the defendant in the amount for an 40 2607B 3 bearing together negotiable a purposes R S 40 2611 L act to instrument deposit to argues that the provide with respect to act limits any interest earned reference to legal Gudicial interest is found in La or said money Additionally in 1992 the of seized proceedings to with judicial interest of 750 00 The State which authorizes the district attorney account recovery cash explicit no only reference in the seized property is evidentiary judgment appealed is that which together with The Forfeiture Act contains The s s judicial interest rather the award of recovery to the return ofthe cash interest court act or his RS designee if the money that is not needed for or instrument in was amended an interest by enacting La attorney fees and other costs in the property by successful defendants in civil forfeiture Subsection L of 40 2611 provides that a claimant whose property has been seized for forfeiture and who has been successful in obtaining as well as the return of his property may be awarded reasonable attorney fees be exempt from storage fees 3 or other related costs Subsection L further amended in 1997 as the claimant in returned to seized together with expressly provides that the property be also substantially the any interest earned monies on The issue of whether an award of of court App 3rd Cir us pursuant was appeal in State the to The by the defendant on The defendant then filed 40 2607B 3 an further noted that the was always act is remedial purposes as in the absence of provision in the awarding legal the act a provided court denied Stating t he legislature to has not seen an appeal was interest from to appealed noted that interest The effectuate its court concluded award of v Gauthier 02 1227 La act App 3rd Cir different facts the third circuit an award fit to that legal interest authorize such read such authorization into the State authorizing an to return to res nova regarding legal authorizing interest is not recoverable under the as be in La R S 40 2621 The legal slightly legal liberally construed be act when the trial court and to account bearing 4 672 22 in earned be awarded by La presently case ordered the State been silent to 93 930 the forfeiture together with to on interest would be inconsistent with the remedial purposes of the third circuit declined under interest judgment allowing by the defendant The third circuit noting the issue the Forfeiture Act is and has unlike the La R S motion a case in seized amount the date of judicial demand which court or before the third Hui Suk Perez In that appeal following which the principal was deposited authority provided in the defendant the interest 634 So 2d 1378 3 2 94 may be awarded appeal on 77 014 00 v the monies seized had been taken reversed was held deposited legal interest monies seized when the forfeiture is overturned before when it as pursuant to the authority given in aforementioned section 2607B 3 invested circuit condition same 03 act award held that See also 854 So 2d 910 where again refused beyond the language of the 4 act and 634 So 2d at 1379 17 4 an to construe the act itself In Gauthier the trial did court award not interest legal on the monies held seized but instead awarded the defendant of use was provided by the While the only bound not we are and therefore act addressing guidance Moreover in circuit in interpreting interest is not awardable in interest Accordingly bearing we Thus award statute they do they and in the conclusion reached monies remedy being specifically limited deposited an are can be provide agreement with the analysis employed by that statute on such the issue of awards that of the Forfeiture Act the finding beyond the scope of the granted within the confines we are improperly the decisions of the third circuit by in our jurisprudence cases was be damages for the loss of The third circuit reversed that award 353 00 not 150 00 in to seized under the improperly to that legal that act interest earned if the monies were accounts find the trial court Joelle Watkins judicial interest in addition to in this the matter return erred in awarding of the monies seized ATTORNEY FEES The State while the authority that the trial to award awarding attorney fees in this case The Act sets pursued the forfeiture action in good faith forth what may be awarded return the Act vests the trial court with reasonable attorney fees within its discretion argues abused its discretion in court because the State acknowledging that to a of his seized property in claimant who is successful in civil a proceeding in La obtaining the RS 40 261l L including reasonable attorney fees The trial transcribed provisions forfeiture reasons and in this court for judgment the evidence concluding proof in this matter case I find that is as reflected in the thirteen pages of its very carefully reviewed the statutory presented in this matter the State has failed more probable 5 than before to carry not that denying the its burden of this property the defendant Watkins s monies convicted was prosecuted was the result of the criminal criminal or jurisprudential support activity for which he could have been discretionary provision of the legal authority or prosecution by the State precludes an claimant We have reviewed the trial 750 00 in Therefore for which Mr convicted or The State cites the of activity we attorney fees find no to Mr but has offered act for its assertion that award of attorney fees court was to good faith a successful and find that the award s reasons Watkins a no well within its discretion merit in this argument and affirm the award of attorney fees ANSWER TO APPEAL The defendant answered the appeal seeking an additional award of attorney fees and expenses incurred in defending this appeal have found merit in the State portion of the trial that warrants court s s primary assignment judgment the relief requested we do not by the appellee of Given that error consider this to and be we vacate a an appeal Therefore it is denied CONCLUSION AND DECREE F or all the judicial interest is foregoing reasons that portion of the judgment that awards hereby reversed and the judgment is otherwise affirmed REVERSED IN PART AFFIRMED IN PART 6
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
