Opinion
No. 18-K-0053
10-29-2018
STATE OF LOUISIANA v. WILLIE J. ELLISON, JR.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL, FIFTH CIRCUIT, PARISH OF JEFFERSON CRICHTON, J., would grant and assigns reasons:
By his conduct, this defendant has earned a substantial hard labor sentence. However, in my view, the sentence of 50 years hard labor of this defendant as a multiple offender is unconstitutionally excessive. I agree with Chief Justice Johnson here that use of the Habitual Offender Law by prosecutors should be cautiously exercised with reasonable discretion, as I have repeatedly stated. State v. Guidry, 2016-1412 (La. 3/15/17), 221 So. 3d 815, 831 (Crichton, J., additionally concurring) ("[T]he abusive frequency with which a de minimis number of jurisdictions invoke habitual offender laws against non-violent actors appears to do little to protect the people of Louisiana, and depletes the already scarce fiscal resources of this state"); State v. Hickman, 2017-0142 (La. 9/29/17), 227 So. 3d 246, 247, reconsideration not considered, 2017-0142 (La. 11/28/17), 230 So. 3d 224 (Crichton, J., additionally concurring) ("Complying with La. C.Cr.P. art. 894.1(C) and under an appropriate set of facts, I believe a trial court can impose a downward departure for certain non-violent offenses."); State v. Hagans, 2016-0103 (La. 10/17/16), 202 So. 3d 475 ("In my view, the fact that a district attorney can file a habitual offender bill of information does not mean that in every case he should do so. . ."); State v. Ladd, 2014-1611 (La. 3/27/15), 164 So. 3d 184 (Knoll, J., additionally concurring and Crichton, J., additionally concurring for the reasons assigned by Justice Knoll) ("In view of the defendant's non-violent criminal record and the sentencing court's imposition of twenty years without the benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence under the Habitual Offender Law, this sentence on its face seems very harsh.").
This defendant has three previous cocaine possession convictions and no - zero - convictions of a crime of violence. In my view, the 50-year sentence is excessive and inhumane, extremely expensive to taxpayers of this state and, under the specific circumstances underlying this matter, retaliatory. Accordingly, I would grant the defendant's writ, vacate the sentence, and remand the matter to the trial court for re-sentencing.