APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE FORTIETH JUDICIAL
DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ST JOHN THE BAPTIST, STATE OF
LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE EDWARD J. GAIDRY, PRO
TEMPORE, DIVISION ''B'', NUMBER 62, 764
composed of Judges Susan M. Chehardy, Marc E. Johnson, and
Stephen J. Windhorst
GRANTED; GUILTY PLEA AND SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED FOR
application is before us on supervisory review and request
for expedited consideration of a sentence imposed upon
relator on November 5, 2018, by the Fortieth Judicial
September 29, 2018, relator was arrested and imprisoned for
domestic abuse in violation of La. R.S. 14:37.7 with bail set
at $6, 500. On October 1, 2018, the duty judge made a
preliminary determination of indigency and appointed a Public
Defender. A bill of information was filed on October
30, 2018 charging relator with aggravated assault in
violation of La. R.S. 14:37. Accordingly to a minute entry
dated November 9, 2018, on November 5, 2018, relator pled
guilty and was sentenced to imprisonment in the parish jail
for "three months" and ordered to pay a fine and
court costs totaling $369.50, with the caveat that "on
payment of fine and cost [sic] the jail sentence is
November 9, 2018,  relator filed a motion to reconsider
sentence, which has been set for hearing on December 3, 2018,
and a notice of intent to apply for writ of review of the
November 5, 2018 decision of the trial court. Relator argued
that the trial court erred by sentencing an indigent
defendant to incarceration in lieu of payment of fine and
court costs; in denying the request for stay of incarceration
and request for release pending appellate review.
writ application, relator contends that the trial court erred
by sentencing an indigent defendant to incarceration in lieu
of payment of a fine and court costs; in denying the
requested stay of incarceration and release pending appellate
review. For the following reasons, we grant relator's
writ application and vacate his guilty plea and sentence.
guilty plea is constitutionally infirm if it is not entered
into freely and voluntarily, or if the Boykin
colloquy is inadequate, or when a defendant is induced to
enter the plea by a plea bargain or what he justifiably
believes was a plea bargain and that bargain is not kept.
State v. McCoil, 05-658 (La.App. 5 Cir. 2/27/06),
924 So.2d 1120, 1124. For a guilty plea to be valid, there
must be a showing that the defendant was informed of and
waived his constitutional rights of trial by jury and
confrontation and the right against compulsory
self-incrimination. Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238,
89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969); State ex rel.
Jackson v. Henderson, 260 La. 90, 255 So.2d 85 (1971).
upon the transcript of the November 5, 2018 guilty plea
proceeding provided to this Court, the trial court did not
conduct a Boykin colloquy with relator prior to
accepting relator's guilty plea. Further, our examination
of the transcript and minute entries reveal an ambiguity in
the sentence imposed regarding the fine and costs as well as
the apparent imposition of imprisonment based on
relator's inability to pay fines and court costs. Thus,
there are fatal defects in the acceptance of the guilty plea.
trial court's failure to conduct a proper Boykin
colloquy rendered relator's guilty plea unconstitutional.
Therefore, relator's guilty plea and sentence are
vacated. Relator is to remain held pursuant to the bail set
by the trial court. The matter is remanded to the trial court
for further proceedings, including arraignment to be held no
later than Tuesday, November 27, 2018.
Louisiana, this 21st day of November, 2018.