State of Louisiana VS Raymond Cormier
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COUR'T OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCtiIT' NUMBER 2013 CA 1935 STATE OF LOUISIANA J =%% VERSUS RAYMOND CORMIER V Tudgment Rendered: Y 2 Zp` Appealed from the 17 Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of Lafourche, Louisiana Trial Court Numbers 505, 116 8c SOS, ll7 Honorable John E. LeBlanc, Judge Camille A. Morvant, II District Attorneys for Appellee Plaintiff State of Louisiana Attorney Annette Fontana Joseph S. Soignet Asst. District Attorneys Thibodaux, LA Anthony T. Marshall Attorney for Intervenor- Appellant Defendant International Fidelity Insurance Company Gonzales, LA x** BEFORE: WHIPPLE, C.J., WELCH, AND CRAIN, JJ. WELCH, J. International Fidelity Insurance Company ( Fidelity) appeals a judgment dismissing its motion to release it of all obligations under a bond. We affirm. The facts forming the basis of this appeal are undisputed. On October 25, 2011, Raymond Cormier was arrested on a drug possession charge. Cormier' s bond was fixed at $ 5, 300. 00. An appearance bond was posted by Fidelity on April 24, 2012. On June 4, 2012, defendant was present in court when the trial court ordered that a scheduled pre- trial conference be continued to June 14, 2012. On June 14, 2012, the defendant failed to appear as ordered. The state moved for a bench warrant and a judgment of bond forfeiture. The trial court accepted the State' s offer of evidence including the bond, the notice to the accused for his appearance, the appearance bond, and the power of attorney used to execute the bond. The court issued a bench warrant for Cormier' s arrest and a judgment of bond forfeiture against Fidelity. The trial court signed a judgment of bond farfeiture on June 22, 2012. On December 20, 2012, Fidelity filed a motion in the trial court under La. C. Cr.P. art. 345, seeking to be released from all obligations under the bond. In the motion, Fidelity argued that it should be relieved of the bond obligations " based on the reason a person gets entered into NCI is based on whether the District Attorney' s Office will extradite or not extradite." According to Fidelity' s brief, the arrest warrant issued after the defendant' s failure to appear was not entered by local law enforcement into the NCIC database, a computerized index of criminal justice information. Fidelity asserted that as a result, its right to surrender the defendant upon his incarceration at another jail facility was severely limited. A hearing on Fidelity' s motion was held and the matter was submitted by Fidelity and the State without argument. Thereafter, the trial court denied the motion, observing that as the court appreciated the motion, " the defendant failed to 2 appear in court him[,] [ a] nd [ the on June 22, 2012[,] [ defendant' s] not t]l-e siuety company has not surrendered i detained a'n any jail facilities." Thus the court found that Fidelity had not met the requirements of La. C.Cr.P. art. 345, which contains various provisions regarding the surrender of a criminal defendant. Fidelity appealed the denial of its morion. It asks this court to annul the judgment of bond forfeiture because it uras not afforded the use of the NCIC database to assist in surrendering Mr. Cormier. Fidelity acknowledges that the trial court correctly pointed out that the law as written daes not address the instant scenario, but submits that as a matter of equity, it should not be held to the stringent requirements of La. C. Cr.P. art. 345 if law enforcement elected not to use the NCIC database. After reviewing the record and the brief's, we find no error in the trial court' s denial of Fidelity' s motion to be released of a11 obligations under the bond. We issue this memorandum opinion in compliance with Uniform Rules- Courts of Appeal Rule 2- 16. 1. B. All costs of this International Fidelity Insurance Company. AFFIRMED. 3 appeal are assessed to appellant,
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.
