The original instrument and the following digest, which constitutes no part of the
legislative instrument, were prepared by Alden A. Clement Jr.
DIGEST
SB 70 Original 2018 Regular Session Mizell
Present law provides that when the court places a defendant on probation, it is to require the
defendant to refrain from criminal conduct and to pay a supervision fee, and it may impose any
specific conditions reasonably related to his rehabilitation, including that the defendant agrees to
searches of his person, his property, his place of residence, his vehicle, or his personal effects, or any
or all of them, at any time, by the probation officer or the parole officer assigned to him, with or
without a warrant of arrest or with or without a search warrant, when the probation officer or the
parole officer has reasonable suspicion to believe that the person who is on probation is engaged in
or has been engaged in criminal activity.
Proposed law retains present law and adds that these searches may also be conducted by any
probation officer or parole officer assigned or directed by the Dept. of Public Safety and Corrections
to conduct the search.
Present law provides relative to decisions of the committee on parole and the nature, order, and
conditions of parole. Present law further provides that one condition that the committee on parole
may impose is that the parolee must agree to visits at his residence or place of employment by the
probation and parole officer at any time, and to searches of his person, property, residence, or
vehicle, when reasonable suspicion exists that criminal activity has been engaged in while on parole.
Proposed law defines "probation and parole officer" as either the probation and parole officer
originally assigned to the parolee or any probation and parole officer who is subsequently assigned
or directed by the Dept. of Public Safety and Corrections to supervise the parolee, whether or not
such assignment is temporary or permanent.
Proposed law otherwise retains present law.
Proposed law provides that the provisions of proposed law are intended to legislatively overrule the
La. Supreme Court's decision in State of Louisiana v. Kayla Brignac, 2017-KK-0448 (Sup. Ct.
10/18/17), to the extent that the court held that a warrantless search of a probationer's residence
violates the provisions of present law (C.Cr.P. Art. 895(A)(13)(a)) relative to a warrantless search
of a probationer's residence when the search is not conducted by the probation officer assigned to
the probationer by the Dept. of Public Safety and Corrections.
Effective August 1, 2018.
(Amends C.Cr.P. Art. 895(A)(13)(a); adds R.S. 15:574.4.2(I))