State Of Louisiana v. Darren L. Jarvis

Supreme Court of Louisiana
January 12, 2021
Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
DARREN L. JARVIS
No.2020-KH-00877
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Darren L. Jarvis - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ,
Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Number(s) 265,848, 1st Circuit
Court of Appeal, Number(s) 2019 KW 1620;
_ _ _ _ _ _
January 12, 2021
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
Weimer, C.J., concurs in part, dissents in part and assigns reasons.
Hughes, J., concurs in part, dissents in part and assigns reasons.
Crain, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.
Johnson, J., concurs in part, dissents in part and assigns reasons.
SJC
JTG
JBM
WJC
01/12/2021 “See News Release 001 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents.”

01/12/21
S
UPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
N
o. 2020-KH-00877
S
TATE OF LOUISIANA
v
ersus
DARRE
N L. JARVIS
ON
SUPERVISORY WRIT TO THE TWENTY-SECOND JUDICIAL
DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ST. TAMMANY
P
ER CURIAM:
W
rit granted. The sentence reductions in Act 403 of 2001 and Act 45 of 2002
are expressly applicable retroactively to inmates sentenced prior to 2001. See La.R.S.
15:308(A)(1) and (2) (prior to amendment by 2014 La. Acts No. 340, § 1) ; see also
State ex rel. Esteen v. State, 16-0949 (La. 1/30/18), 239 So.3d 233, 238 (per curiam).
Applying these amendments to applicant’s life sentence as a third-felony offender is
difficult because of confusion in the record, and discrepancies between the transcript
and the district court’s written reasons for judgment, with regard to whether a prior
conviction for simple burglary was used as a predicate felony in the habitual offender
adjudication. Given this record, it is possible that defendant’s life sentence exceeds that
authorized by statute if simple burglary was not used as a predicate felony. See La.R.S.
15:529.1, as amended by 2001 La. Acts 403. Accordingly, we grant the application to
vacate the habitual offender adjudication and sentence, and we remand to the district
court to conduct a new habitual offender adjudication. A pplicant will also have the
opportunity to argue in the district court that the sentence imposed is excessive or seek
a downward departure below the statutorily mandated minimum sentence. See State v.

2

Dorthey, 623 So.2d 1276 (La. 1993).
VACATED AND REMANDED