State of Louisiana Versus Corey Anderson

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 24-K-333

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

COREY ANDERSON COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA

July 26, 2024

Linda Wiseman
First Deputy Clerk

IN RE STATE OF LOUISIANA

APPLYING FOR SUPERVISORY WRIT FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT,
PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA, DIRECTED TO THE HONORABLE DANYELLE M.
TAYLOR, DIVISION "O", NUMBER 21-3191, 21-3192, 22-5393

Panel composed of Judges Stephen J. Windhorst,
John J. Molaison, Jr., and Amanda L. Calogero, Pro Tempore

WRIT GRANTED; STAY DENIED

The State seeks emergency supervisory review of the trial court’s ruling that

defendant, Corey Anderson, is an unrestorable incompetent, that he is unlikely in

the foreseeable future to be capable of standing trial, and that he is to be released

ten days from July 17, 2024 or on July 27, 2024, unless the Louisiana Department

of Health initiates civil commitment proceedings. The State has also filed an

Emergency Motion to Stay Release. For the following reasons, this writ

application is granted, and the stay is denied as moot.

La. C.Cr.P. art. 648 provides in pertinent part, “B. (1) … At any time after

commitment and on the recommendation of the director or administrator of

the treatment facility that the defendant will not attain the capacity to proceed

with his trial in the foreseeable future, the court shall, … conduct a contradictory

hearing to determine whether the defendant is, and will in the foreseeable future

be, incapable of standing trial and whether he is a danger to himself or others.”

24-K-333

We find that the trial court erred in its ruling. At the hearing on July 17,

2024, Dr. Richard Richoux, a stipulated expert in the field of forensic psychology

or psychiatry, testified that defendant was incompetent to proceed in accordance

with his July 15, 2024 report. He further testified that if defendant received

substantive treatment it was possible that he could be restored to competency. Dr.

Richoux also testified that he has never found that defendant was an unrestorable

incompetent based upon the lack of treatment and that in his review of the Eastern

Louisiana Mental Health System report dated November 20, 2023, they also never

opined that defendant was an unrestorable incompetent. As such, there is no basis

for a finding that defendant is an unrestorable incompetent. Further, the writ

application provides no evidence that there has been a recommendation by the

director or administrator of the treatment facility that defendant will not attain the

capacity to proceed with his trial in the foreseeable future. See La. C.Cr.P. art. 648.

For the foregoing reasons, this writ application is granted and the request for

a stay is denied as moot. We vacate the trial court’s order finding that defendant is

an unrestorable incompetent and ordering the Louisiana Department of Health to

either initiate civil commitment proceedings within ten days or release defendant.

We remand this matter and order the trial court to evaluate defendant’s

competency to proceed.

Gretna, Louisiana, this 26th day of July, 2024.

ALC
SJW

2

STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 24-K-333

VERSUS FIFTH CIRCUIT

COREY ANDERSON COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA

MOLAISON, J., CONCURS WITH REASONS
I agree that the trial court did not follow the procedures outlined in La.

C.Cr.P. art. 648.

I would also note that the writ application, as a whole, evidences that the
defendant has been found competent at various times. This was the conclusion of
the Eastern Louisiana Mental Health System, Forensic Division on November 30,
2023. In addition, the associated evaluation stated that the defendant would remain
competent as long as he continued to take his prescribed medication. However, at
the hearing on July 17, 2024, Dr. Richoux specifically observed that the defendant
had made a choice to discontinue his medication. Dr. Richoux also opined that the
defendant could be restored to competency. I believe that this evidence contradicts
the trial court’s finding of unrestorable incompetence at this stage of the
proceedings.
JJM

24-K-333

SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CURTIS B. PURSELL

CHIEF JUDGE CLERK OF COURT

SUSAN S. BUCHHOLZ
FREDERICKA H. WICKER
CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK
JUDE G. GRAVOIS
MARC E. JOHNSON
STEPHEN J. WINDHORST LINDA M. WISEMAN
JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR.
FIRST DEPUTY CLERK
SCOTT U. SCHLEGEL
TIMOTHY S. MARCEL FIFTH CIRCUIT
MELISSA C. LEDET
JUDGES 101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053)
DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF
POST OFFICE BOX 489
GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054 (504) 376-1400

(504) 376-1498 FAX
www.fifthcircuit.org

NOTICE OF DISPOSITION CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY
I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE DISPOSITION IN THE FOREGOING MATTER HAS BEEN
TRANSMITTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIFORM RULES - COURT OF APPEAL, RULE 4-6 THIS
DAY 07/26/2024 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, THE TRIAL COURT CLERK OF COURT, AND AT LEAST ONE OF
THE COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR EACH PARTY, AND TO EACH PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY
COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW:

24-K-333
E-NOTIFIED
24th Judicial District Court (Clerk)
Honorable Danyelle M. Taylor (DISTRICT JUDGE)
Darren A. Allemand (Relator) Thomas J. Butler (Relator)

MAILED
Andrew J. Duffy (Respondent) Honorable Paul D. Connick, Jr. (Relator)
Attorney at Law District Attorney
848 2nd Street Twenty-Fourth Judicial District
3rd Floor 200 Derbigny Street
Gretna, LA 70053 Gretna, LA 70053