State Of Louisiana v. J Errit Montgomery

Supreme Court of Louisiana
November 18, 2020
Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
J
ERRIT MONTGOMERY
No.2020-KK-00678
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: State of Louisiana - Applicant Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory Writ,
Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Number(s) 10-16-0315, 05-
16-0403, 09-17-0293, 1st Circuit Court of Appeal, Number(s) 2020 KW 0039;
_ _ _ _ _ _
November 18, 2020
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
Hughes, J., would deny.
WJC
JLW
SJC
JTG
JHB
11/18/2020 “See News Release 044 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents.”

11/18/20
S
UPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No
. 2020-KK-00678
STA
TE OF LOUISIANA
ve
rsus
J
ERRIT MONTGOMERY
ON
SUPERVISORY WRIT TO THE NINETEENTH
JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE
PE
R CURIAM:
W
rit granted. On August 13, 2007, defendant pleaded guilty to sexual
battery, La.R.S. 14:43.1, 1 and indecent behavior with a juvenile, La.R.S. 14:81,
which offenses he committed on May 29, 2006. The factual basis entered at the
time of the pleas indicated that the victim of the sexual battery was almost 12 years
old at the time of the crime. Defendant completed his term s of imprisonment in
2009. Thereafter, he repeatedly failed to comply with the conditions of supervised
release, as outlined in La.R.S. 15:561.1 et seq., which ultimately lead to additional
convictions and terms of imprisonment. Upon his release in 2016, he was arrested
multiple times for again failing to comply with the conditions of supervised release
provided in La.R.S. 15:561.1 et seq. , and he was charged again. He filed a motion
to quash the charges.
The district court granted the motion, finding that there was never a judicial
determination that the victim of the sexual battery was under the age of 13, and
therefore the supervised conditions provided in La.R.S. 15:561.1 et seq. did not
apply to defendant. See La.R.S. 15:561.3 (“ The provisions of this Chapter shall
1 This provision was amended by 2006 La. Acts 103 (eff. August 15, 2006) to provide an
enhanced penalty when the victim is under the age 13. Defendant committed the offense before
the effective date of the Act, and therefore could not be charged or sentenced under the amended
law.

20-KK-0678

2

apply to any person convicted, on or after August 15, 2006, of a sex offense as
defined in R.S. 15:541 when the victim is under the age of thirteen years. ”). The
district court erred.
As noted above, it is clear from the plea colloquy that defendant pleaded
guilty to the sexual battery of a child who was under the age of 13. This was
established in the factual basis provided by the State and agreed to by defendant. In
addition, the bill of information provided the child’s date of birth, the date of the
offense, and thus indicated that the victim was under the age of 13 at the time of
the offense. Moreover, defendant has never contested that the victim was under the
age of 13 at the time he committed the crime.
Therefore, we grant the State’s application. We vacate the district court’s
ruling, and we deny defendant’s motion. We remand to the district court for further
proceedings consistent with the views expressed here.
REVERSED AND REMANDED