The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal publicly scolded the Office of Juvenile Justice for its recent refusal to place a juvenile in secure custody following his arrest for theft of a firearm, drug possession and burglary charges.

The original juvenile case was heard before Judge Elvin C. Fontenot in Leesville City Court. Vernon Parish District Attorney Terry Lambright said as part of a plea agreement between his office and the juvenile — through legal counsel and the boy’s father — the juvenile was ordered into secure custody of the Office of Juvenile Justice until his 20th birthday for simple burglary, illegal possession of a handgun by a juvenile, possession of marijuana, possession of a controlled dangerous substance schedule II and schedule IV, and theft of a firearm.

When the Office of Juvenile Justice refused to place the juvenile in secure custody and instead placed the juvenile in a non-secured group home, Lambright filed a motion for a hearing in court ordering the Office of Juvenile Justice to show why they did not have the juvenile in secure custody and to hold the office in contempt of court.

“This motion was filed after the Office of Juvenile Justice was ordered twice by the court to place the juvenile in secure custody and the juvenile even leaving the group home and returning to Leesville to be once again arrested for new crimes,” Lambright said.

After the hearing, the court held The Office of Juvenile Justice in contempt of court, ordered them to pay a $500 fine and $500 for every month the juvenile was not in secure custody, and ordered them again to place the juvenile in secure custody.

The Office of Juvenile Justice said they would not do that and filed a Writ of Review with the Louisiana 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal, arguing they alone had absolute and sole authority to determine what type of custody and the placement of a juvenile in their care.

Lambright argued the juvenile judge has the authority to determine the type of custody, either secure custody or non-secure custody.

In it’s ruling, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeal stated the Office of Juvenile Justice “does not acknowledge this court’s prior rulings addressing the issue assigned herein or put forth a basis for finding these rulings are flawed. Thus, this court finds it necessary to reiterate to OJJ that the rulings … are the binding law in this circuit. A juvenile court has full authority to dictate whether a juvenile placed into the custody of the OJJ is to be in secure or non-secure custody.”

The court said it has “repeatedly ruled that a trial court has the authority to determine whether a juvenile should be in secure or non-secure custody; the OJJ’s continued refusal to accept that proposition flies in the face of that jurisprudence.”

Lambright said he was pleased with the ruling.

“This has been a repeated and recurring issue with the Office of Juvenile Justice,” he said. “They have continually ignored court orders and jurisprudence. The Office of Juvenile Justice is not the sole determiner of what is in the best interest of juveniles or the public. My office will continue to hold people and even state agencies accountable.”