Blog/News

An Alford plea is a type of guilty plea in criminal law where a defendant does not admit to the criminal act but acknowledges that the prosecution has enough evidence to likely secure a conviction. The plea allows the defendant to maintain their innocence while still accepting the legal consequences of a guilty plea. It is named after the 1970 U.S. Supreme Court case North Carolina v. Alford.

 

In an Alford plea:

 

1. The defendant asserts their innocence or does not admit guilt.
2. The defendant agrees to be treated as guilty for sentencing purposes.
3. The court must determine that the plea is made knowingly, voluntarily, and based on a strong factual basis for guilt.

 

The plea is typically used when a defendant wishes to avoid the risk of a harsher sentence if convicted at trial. It allows them to accept a plea bargain while not fully admitting to the crime. Despite maintaining innocence, the defendant is convicted and punished just as if they had entered a standard guilty plea.

 

In Louisiana, criminal negligence is defined under Louisiana Revised Statutes (La. R.S. 14:12). It occurs when there is such a disregard of the interest of others that the conduct of the offender amounts to a gross deviation below the standard of care expected of a reasonably prudent person under similar circumstances.

 

Key Points:

• Gross Deviation: Criminal negligence involves a significant departure from what a reasonably careful person would do in a similar situation.
• Standard of Care: It is measured by what a reasonably prudent person would have done under the same or similar circumstances.
• Disregard for Safety: The negligence must show a disregard for the safety or welfare of others, which leads to harm or poses a significant risk of harm.

 

Criminal negligence can be a component in various crimes, such as negligent homicide or negligent injuring, where the negligent act results in death or bodily harm. The penalties for crimes involving criminal negligence can vary, but they often involve fines, imprisonment, or both, depending on the severity of the offense and its consequences.

 

 

Prosecutorial immunity, also known as absolute immunity, is a legal doctrine that protects prosecutors from being held personally liable for their actions in the course of performing their duties. This immunity is intended to ensure that prosecutors can carry out their responsibilities effectively without fear of being sued for actions taken as part of their official duties.

 

Prosecutorial immunity typically applies to actions such as initiating prosecutions, presenting evidence in court, making arguments, and exercising discretion in deciding how to handle a case. This immunity is based on the principle that prosecutors need to have the freedom to make decisions in the pursuit of justice without the threat of lawsuits hindering their work.

 

It's important to note that prosecutorial immunity is not unlimited. Prosecutors can still be held accountable for actions that are outside the scope of their official duties, such as engaging in illegal conduct or knowingly presenting false evidence in court.

 

Prosecutorial immunity is a complex legal concept that varies by jurisdiction, and the specific scope and limitations of immunity may differ based on the laws and court rulings in a particular jurisdiction.

 

Expungement in Louisiana criminal law refers to the process of sealing or erasing a person's criminal record from public view. This legal procedure allows individuals to have their criminal records cleared, meaning that the records are not accessible to the general public, although certain law enforcement agencies and other specified entities may still access them.

Key Points about Expungement in Louisiana:

1. Eligibility:

   • Misdemeanors: Generally, individuals can seek expungement for misdemeanor convictions if it has been at least five years since the completion of their sentence, including probation or parole, and they have not been convicted of any other crimes during that period.
   • Felonies: Felony convictions are more challenging to expunge. Typically, expungement is available only for non-violent felony offenses. It must have been at least ten years since the completion of the sentence, and the individual must not have been convicted of any other crimes during that period.
   • Arrests without Convictions: If a person was arrested but not convicted, or if the charges were dismissed or resulted in acquittal, they might be eligible for expungement.

2. Ineligibility:

   • Certain crimes, such as violent offenses, sex crimes, and crimes involving minors, are generally not eligible for expungement.
   • Multiple convictions can complicate the eligibility for expungement.

3. Procedure:

   • Filing a Petition: The individual must file a petition for expungement in the court where the conviction or arrest occurred.
   • Hearing: A hearing may be scheduled where the court will review the petition and determine if the expungement is warranted.
   • Costs: There are usually fees associated with filing for expungement, which can be substantial.

4. Effects:

   • Once an expungement is granted, the record is sealed, and the individual can legally state that they have not been arrested or convicted for the expunged offense.
   • However, the record is not destroyed and can be accessed by certain entities, such as law enforcement agencies, in specific circumstances.

5. Limitations:

   • Expungement does not restore firearm rights automatically.
   • Certain professional licensing boards and employers, especially in sensitive fields, may still have access to expunged records.

Legal Context:

Louisiana's expungement laws are outlined in the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure. The specific requirements and procedures can vary, and legal counsel is often recommended to navigate the complexities of the process.  Overall, expungement provides a means for individuals to move past their criminal records, potentially improving their employment prospects and social standing by ensuring that past offenses do not continually impede their future opportunities.

 

The right to compulsory process in the context of a criminal trial is a fundamental principle of the legal system, particularly in common law jurisdictions like the United States. It essentially grants the defendant the right to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence that may be favorable to their case. This right is enshrined in the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states that the accused shall enjoy the right "to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor." In practice, this means that if a defendant believes that certain witnesses or evidence could help exonerate them or weaken the prosecution's case, they have the right to request the court to compel those witnesses to testify or produce that evidence. The court must then issue subpoenas or orders to ensure that those witnesses appear in court and provide their testimony, or that the evidence is produced for examination. The right to compulsory process is crucial for ensuring a fair trial and protecting the defendant's rights to present a defense. Without this right, defendants could be unfairly deprived of evidence that could potentially prove their innocence or cast doubt on the prosecution's case.

The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects individuals from being compelled to incriminate themselves in a criminal case. This means that a person cannot be forced to testify against themselves in court, and it also extends to other situations where self-incrimination might occur, such as during police interrogation. It's commonly referred to as the right against self-incrimination or the right to remain silent.

 

For an incriminating statement to be admissible at a criminal trial, it must meet certain legal standards. Here are some factors that determine admissibility:

 

1. Voluntariness: The statement must be given voluntarily, without coercion, duress, or undue influence. If the statement is obtained through coercion or threats, it may be deemed involuntary and therefore inadmissible.

2. Miranda Rights: If the statement was made during custodial interrogation, the defendant must have been informed of their Miranda rights (the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney, etc.). If the defendant was not properly advised of these rights and waived them, any statements they make may be excluded from trial.

3. Waiver of Rights: The defendant must have knowingly and voluntarily waived their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and other applicable rights before making the statement.

4. Understanding: The defendant must have had a sufficient understanding of the nature of their statement and the consequences of making it. If the defendant was mentally incapacitated, intoxicated, or otherwise unable to understand the implications of their statement, it may be deemed inadmissible.

5. Relevance: The statement must be relevant to the case at hand. Irrelevant or extraneous statements may be excluded from trial.

6. Hearsay: If the statement is considered hearsay (an out-of-court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted), it may be subject to exclusion unless it falls within a recognized exception to the hearsay rule.

 

Ultimately, admissibility of incriminating statements is determined by the judge based on the circumstances surrounding the statement and its compliance with legal standards.

 

The right to counsel in connection with criminal cases is a fundamental legal principle that ensures individuals accused of a crime have the right to be represented by an attorney during various stages of the criminal justice process. This right is often considered a fundamental human right and is recognized in many legal systems around the world, including the United States where it is enshrined in the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Key aspects of the right to counsel include:

1. Legal Representation: Individuals accused of a crime have the right to have an attorney represent them at various stages of the criminal proceedings. This includes during police interrogations, pretrial hearings, arraignments, trials, and any other critical stages of the legal process.

2. Access to Legal Advice: Defendants have the right to consult with an attorney for legal advice before making important decisions, such as whether to waive their right to remain silent or enter into a plea agreement.

3. Effective Assistance of Counsel: The right to counsel not only guarantees the presence of an attorney but also ensures that the legal representation is competent and effective. Defendants have the right to an attorney who provides adequate legal assistance.

4. Free Legal Representation for Indigent Defendants: In many legal systems, if a defendant cannot afford to hire a private attorney, the state is obligated to provide them with legal representation at no cost. This is to ensure that economic status does not impede the right to counsel.

5. Right to Self-Representation: While the right to counsel is a fundamental right, individuals also have the right to represent themselves in court. However, this is often discouraged due to the complexities of legal proceedings.

The right to counsel is essential to safeguard the fairness of criminal trials and to protect individuals from unjust prosecution. It ensures that defendants have a fair opportunity to present their defense, understand the charges against them, and navigate the complexities of the legal process.

 

Super Lawyers is a rating service that identifies outstanding lawyers from more than 70 practice areas. The selection process involves a combination of peer nominations, evaluations, and independent research. Candidates are evaluated based on factors such as professional achievement, peer recognition, and other criteria specific to their practice areas.

 

The Super Lawyers list is published annually and is designed to provide a credible resource for individuals seeking legal representation. It is intended to showcase exceptional attorneys who have demonstrated a high level of professional achievement and peer recognition. Super Lawyers also publishes a separate Rising Stars list, which recognizes up-and-coming attorneys who are 40 years old or younger or who have been in practice for 10 years or less.

 

Being named to the Louisiana Super Lawyers list can be considered a significant accomplishment for attorneys. Inclusion in the Super Lawyers list is often viewed as a recognition of a lawyer's professional achievements, reputation, and expertise within their practice area. It signifies that the attorney has been identified through a rigorous selection process that involves peer nominations, evaluations, and independent research.

 

Stephen Hébert is a New Orleans based sole-practioner, defending clients in criminal matters across Louisiana.  After working at the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal, the Orleans Parish District Attorney’s Office and a highly regarded commercial litigation firm, Hébert started his private practice in July 2010 and Super Lawyers quickly took note of Hébert’s outstanding abilities in criminal defense.  Super Lawyers named Hébert a Rising Star in 2012 and 2013.  In 2023, Hébert’s was named to Louisiana Super Lawyers for the tenth  consecutive year (2015-2024).  While criminal defense comprises most of his practice, Hébert's current practice areas additionally include general civil litigation and personal injury (plaintiff).

 

Under Louisiana criminal law, a Bill of Information is a formal charging document used in lieu of a grand jury indictment. It outlines the criminal charges against a defendant and provides details about the alleged offenses. This streamlined process is common for less serious offenses, and it allows prosecutors to bring charges without convening a grand jury.  However, when the alleged offense carries a mandatory life sentence, the District Attorney must indict by grand jury.