State Of Louisiana v. Diamond McElwee

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2026 KW 0008
VERSUS

DIAMOND MCELWEE FEBRUARY 20, 2026
In Re: Diamond McElwee, applying for supervisory writs, 19th

Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No.
DC-21-05963.

BEFORE : MILLER, EDWARDS, AND FIELDS, Ju.

WRIT GRANTED. Upon completion of the period of probation,
the defendant shall have satisfied the sentence imposed. See La.
Code Crim. P. art. 898. Probation shall not be extended based
solely upon the defendant’s inability to pay fines, fees, or
restitution to the victim. See La. Code Crim. P. art. 894.4. It
is well established that once a probationary period has elapsed,
the defendant has automatically satisfied the sentence
imposed. State v. Cannon, 457 So.2d 1177, 1178-1179 (La. 1984);
see also State ex rel. Strain v. State, 96-2308 (La. App. lst Cir.
6/20/97), 696 So.2d 664, 668. In this case, the record reflects
that relator was placed on misdemeanor probation on August 23,
2023. A warrant was issued for relator’s failure to appear on
March 5, 2024, and was recalled one day later on March 6,
2024. Thus, suspending the probationary period for one day. The
record does not reflect that a warrant, summons, or detainers for
violating a condition of probation was issued for relator during
the remaining probationary period. As a result, relator’s
probation was completed, albeit unsuccessfully, on August 24,
2025. Therefore, relator’s probation may not be extended, and the
district court’s ruling denying the motion to quash the probation
revocation proceedings in this matter is reversed, the motion is
granted, and this matter is remanded for further proceedings in
light of the outstanding restitution owed by relator.

WEF
BDE

Miller, J., concurs in part and dissents in part. If we assume
that the revocation hearing was properly noticed, indicating the
grounds for revocation, prior to the end of the probationary
period, (a dubious assumption in light of the record before us)
when relator appeared on August 25, 2025, the district court had
the option to revoke the probation or terminate the probation. If
the district court was inclined to terminate the probation, it was
necessary that relator’s ability to pay be considered. See La.
Code Crim. P. art. 894.4. Instead, the district court took relator
into custody and expressly extended the probation, resulting in a
probationary term that exceeded the time allowed for misdemeanor
probation. This constitutes error and I would grant the writ to
correct. However, I would not remand for further proceedings
associated with the restitution. Upon completion of the period of
probation, the defendant shall have satisfied the sentence
imposed. See La. Code Crim. P. art. 898.

STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

WRT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

won CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT