Remond Dixson VS Louisiana Department of Public Safety & Corrections
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NO. 2014 CA 1400 REMOND DIXON VERSUS LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS Judgment Rendered: _A_P_R_2_4_2_0_15 ***** On Appeal from the 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana Trial Court No. C615411 The Honorable William Morvant, Judge Presiding ***** Remond Dixson South Lake Providence, Louisiana Appellant, In Proper Person William L. Kline Baton Rouge, Louisiana Attorney for Defendant/Appellee, Department of Public Safety and Corrections ***** BEFORE: McDONALD, CRAIN, AND HOLDRIDGE, JJ. CRAIN,J. Remond Dixson 1 is an inmate in the custody of the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections (DPSC), serving an eighteen-year sentence for an armed robbery committed in 1998. Dixson was previously convicted of purse snatching in 1993. Because in 1998 both armed robbery and purse snatching were listed as crimes of violence in Louisiana Revised Statute 14:2B, DPSC classified Dixson as a second offender of a crime of violence and denied him good time eligibility pursuant to Louisiana Revised Statute 15:571.3D, which provides: Diminution of sentence shall not be allowed an inmate in the custody of the Department of Public Safety and Corrections if the instant offense is a second offense crime of violence as defined by [Louisiana Revised Statute] 14:2(B). Dixson argues that because purse snatching was not listed as a crime of violence in Section 14:2B in 1993, to consider it a crime of violence now for purposes of denying him good time eligibility violates his right against ex post facto application of law. Through its two-step administrative remedy procedure, DPSC rejected Dixson's argument and denied his request to recalculate his sentence. After de nova review, the district court affirmed DPSC's decision. Dixson now appeals. The law in effect at the time of the commission of the offense determines the penalty that the convicted accused must suffer. Massey v. Louisiana Dept. of Public Safety & Corrections, 13-2789 (La. 10/15114), 149 So. 3d 780, 783. Once a sentence is imposed on a defendant, any change in the law that later occurs cannot be applied to that defendant to increase that sentence or penalty. Williams v. Creed, 07-0614 (La. 12/21/07), 978 So. 2d 419, 425, writ denied, 08-0433 (La. 10/2/09), 18 So. 3d 111. Here, the denial of good time eligibility while the defendant serves his armed robbery sentence does not increase the penalty for the Although the name is spelled "Remond Dixon" in the caption of this case, the record reflects that the proper spelling is "Remond Dixson." 2 purse snatching conviction. Rather, it increases the penalty for the armed robbery conviction. Cf State v. Rolen, 95-0347 (La. 9/15/95), 662 So. 2d 446, 448. When Dixson committed the armed robbery in 1998, Section 15:571.3D was in effect and both purse snatching and armed robbery were listed as crimes of violence in Section 14:2B. Thus, in 1998 Dixson had notice that he would not be eligible for good time if he committed another crime of violence, and there is no ex post facto violation. See Id. at 448-49; Pratt v. LeBlanc, 12-0833 (La. App. 1 Cir. 1/8/13), 2013WL85289, writ denied, 13-0268 (La. 6/14/13), 118 So. 3d 1083. We affirm the judgment of the district court in accordance with Uniform Rules - Courts of Appeal, Rule 2-16. lB. All costs of this appeal are assessed to Remond Dixson. AFFIRMED. 3
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.
