Could the Union Parish Detention Center charge arresting agencies booking fees or stop operating without a dedicated tax?

Plain-English summary

The Union Parish Police Jury asked seven questions about operating and financing its detention center. The Attorney General said the center's commission remained obligated to operate it even though voters had not approved a special operating tax: the statute also allowed the police jury to budget funds for it. As the center's designated keeper, the commission had to accept people charged with state crimes and could not charge the arresting agency a booking fee for them.

The AG initially described the ordinary rule that a jail keeper could charge for municipal-ordinance detainees because the keeper generally need not accept them. He then applied Union Parish's special statute requiring overnight incarceration in the detention center. Because municipalities had no alternative overnight facility under that law, he concluded the center had to accept municipal-ordinance detainees too and could not charge their arresting agencies a booking fee. He also said the commission could not demand the sheriff's statutory share of criminal fines, but could seek an appropriation from any qualifying year-end surplus. For prisoners transferred from other parishes under the statute he discussed, the receiving center was entitled to compensation.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2001. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Did the detention center need a special tax to keep operating?
The AG said no. La. R.S. 15:850.5 allowed operating expenses to be paid from a special tax or funds budgeted by the police jury; the commission still had to operate the center.

Could the center charge a city to book someone arrested for a state crime?
No. The AG said the center had to accept state-crime detainees and could not bill the arresting agency a booking fee.

Could it charge a booking fee for a city-ordinance arrest?
The AG said no for this center. Although a jail keeper normally had no duty to accept ordinance detainees, La. R.S. 15:850.6 required overnight detention in the Union Parish center, so cities had no alternative.

Could the center bill a municipality for housing someone charged with a state crime?
The AG said the center, as keeper, bore the responsibility for housing state-crime detainees and was not entitled to municipal reimbursement for that housing.

Did the opinion set a daily housing fee for municipal-ordinance detainees?
No. The fifth answer said the center had to accept those detainees under the overnight-custody statute. It did not state a maximum daily fee or separately resolve housing reimbursement for that category.

Could the commission take part of the sheriff's criminal-fine share?
The AG said the statute gave that share to sheriffs, not the detention center commission. He identified a possible appropriation from a qualifying year-end surplus in the criminal court fund.

Could it receive payment for prisoners sent from another parish?
The AG said yes under La. R.S. 15:706's transfer arrangement; the transferring parish paid the authorized compensation for keeping and feeding those prisoners.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion read the Union Parish center's enabling provisions alongside the general jail-keeper and prisoner-transfer laws. La. R.S. 15:850.5 addressed budgeted operating costs, while La. R.S. 15:850.6 made the center the required overnight facility in Union Parish. La. R.S. 15:571.11 governed the criminal court fund, and La. R.S. 15:706 supplied compensation for an authorized interparish transfer. The AG's municipal-booking answer depended on Union Parish's special overnight-custody requirement.

Citations and references

• La. R.S. 15:850.5
• La. R.S. 15:850.6
• La. R.S. 15:571.11
• La. R.S. 15:706

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.state.la.us/Opinion/Download/01-0135

Original opinion text

June 15, 2001
OPINION NUMBER 01-135

Mr. S. Andrew Shealy
Assistant District Attorney
Discussion of Union Parish Detention
Lincoln Parish Office
Center.
Post Office Box 777
Ruston, Louisiana 71273-0777
La. R.S. 15:850.1, et seq.
Mr. Willie T. Sensley, Sr., President La. R.S. 15:704 La. R.S. 15:571.11
Police Jury of Union Parish
La. R.S. 15:706
Post Office Box 723
Farmerville, Louisiana 71241

Dear Sirs:

We received your requests for an opinion on behalf of the Union Parish Police Jury. You raise the following issues regarding the Union Parish Detention Center:

1. Is the Union Parish Detention Center Commission required by law to continue to operate the Detention Center even though there has never been a tax passed to fund the operations as per La. R. S. 15:850.5?

2. Can the Union Parish Detention Center charge a booking or administrative fee to the particular arresting agency for each arrestee brought to the Detention Center by it on a violation of a state criminal statute?

3. Can the Union Parish Detention Center charge a booking or administrative fee to the arresting agency for each arrestee brought to the Detention Center by it on a violation of a local or municipal ordinance?

4. Can the Union Parish Detention Center receive reimbursement from a municipality for the housing of persons arrested by municipal law enforcement officers for violation of a state criminal statute? If so, is there a maximum daily fee for housing such a person?

Page 2

Mr. S. Andrew Shealy
Opinion No. 01-135
Page 2

5. Can the Union Parish Detention Center be reimbursed from a municipality for the housing of persons arrested by municipal law enforcement officers for violating a city or municipal ordinance? If so, is there a maximum daily fee which may be charged for housing such person?

6. Can the Union Parish Detention Center seek a percentage of the monies received into the criminal court fund or any other fund from the payments of fines and costs by persons who plead guilty or are convicted of any offense, including traffic offenses, in the Union Parish District Court as reimbursement for the housing of inmates in the Union Parish Detention Center?

7. Is there any state law which provides funding to parishes, sheriffs, or detention centers for the housing of inmates in facilities in other parishes as a result of overcrowding, safety precautions, or other similar reasons?

1. Is the Union Parish Detention Center Commission required by law to
   continue to operate the Detention Center even though there has
   never been a tax passed to fund the operations as mentioned in La.
   R. S. 15:850.5?

La. R.S. 15:850.1 provides that the governing authority of Union Parish may create, establish, and construct a centralized, single parish jail and prison for the purpose of providing for the maintenance and upkeep of all persons lawfully incarcerated in Union Parish. This jail and prison is known as the Union Parish Detention Center. La. R.S. 15:850.6 actually prohibits the incarceration of any person overnight in Union Parish in any facility other than the Union Parish Detention Center.

Pursuant to La. R.S. 15:850.5, the expenses or costs of the operation and maintenance of the Union Parish Detention Center, including salaries, wages, facility operating costs, and the feeding and maintenance of prisoners, shall be paid monthly by the Union Parish Police Jury treasurer upon approval of such by the Union Parish Detention Center Commission. The payments are to be made out of the funds derived from special taxes voted, levied, and collected, or budgeted for that purpose.

You indicate in the request that a tax has not been levied to fund the operation of the center. It is our understanding that the funds for operation of the center have been budgeted by the police jury. The statute does not mandate that the funds be derived from a special tax. The statute provides that funds shall be derived out of a tax or budgeted by the police jury. Thus, the center may operate without

Page 3

Mr. S. Andrew Shealy
Opinion No. 01-135
Page 3

its funds being derived out of a special tax. The governing authority created and established the center and commission pursuant to La. R.S. 15:850.1, et seq. We believe the Commission is obligated to operate the center even though the funds used to operate it are not derived from a special tax. The statute does not mandate so.

2. Can the Union Parish Detention Center charge a booking or
   administrative fee to the particular arresting agency for each arrestee
   brought to the Detention Center by it on a violation of a state criminal
   statute?

La. R.S. 15:704 provides that the sheriff shall be the keeper of the public jail of his parish. La. R.S. 15:850.4 specifically delegates the Union Parish Detention Center Commission as the keeper of the Union Parish Detention Center and specifically relieves the sheriff of that duty. Our jurisprudence dictates that the sheriff, as keeper of the parish jail, must accept for incarceration all persons charged with violating a state criminal statute. Thus, the Union Parish Detention Center must accept for incarceration all persons charged with violating a state criminal statute. Amiss v. Dumas 411 So.2d 1137 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1982). See also Attorney General Opinions 00-432, 90-17, 90-427, and 89-234. Accordingly, the Union Parish Detention Center may not charge a fee to the arresting agency for booking a person who is charged with violating a state criminal statute.

We do point out that La. R.S. 15:304 provides in pertinent part as follows:

All expenses incurred in the different parishes of the state . . . by the arrest, confinement, and prosecution of persons accused or convicted of crimes, their removal to prison, the pay of witnesses specifically provided for by law, jurors and all prosecutorial expenses whatever attending criminal proceedings shall be paid by the respective parishes in which the offense charged may have been committed . . . The expenses shall be paid by the parish treasurer or by the city of New Orleans after an account of the expenses shall be duly certified to be correct by the presiding judge and the clerk of court.

An earlier version of this statute was interpreted by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Mejia, 197 So.2d 73 (La. 1967). The court concluded that the parish where the crime was committed must pay the expenses, wherever incurred, in connection with the case. The case involved a violation of a state criminal statute wherein the defendant successfully moved for a change of venue. The crime was committed in St. Mary Parish but the case was ultimately tried in East Baton Rouge Parish. The parish where the crime was committed was responsible for the expenses incurred in the case and had to reimburse the other parishes involved for their expenses.

Page 4

Mr. S. Andrew Shealy
Opinion No. 01-135
Page 4

3. Can the Union Parish Detention Center charge a booking or
   administrative fee to the arresting agency for each arrestee brought
   to the Detention Center by it on a violation of a local or municipal
   ordinance?

Although the keeper must accept all persons charged with violating a state criminal statute, the keeper is under no obligation to do so for municipal violations. Amiss, supra. As such, the keeper may charge the arresting agency a booking fee for those charged with violating a local or municipal ordinance. See also Attorney General Opinion No. 01-132.

La. R. S. 15:850.6 mandates the incarceration of any person overnight in Union Parish be in the Detention Center. This statute, in our opinion, creates a different situation than that in Amiss because the municipalities have no choice. A person who is to be incarcerated overnight in Union Parish must be incarcerated in the Detention Center. Therefore, it is our opinion that the Detention Center must also accept for incarceration those persons violating a local or municipal ordinance and it cannot charge the arresting agency for such. The Detention Center may, of course, seek recourse with the legislature.

4. Can the Union Parish Detention Center receive reimbursement from
   a municipality for the housing of persons arrested by municipal law
   enforcement officers for violation of a state criminal statute? If so, is
   there a maximum daily fee for housing such a person?

In response to this question, we once again point out that the Union Parish Detention Center Commission is the keeper of the Union Parish Detention Center. As keeper, it must accept for incarceration all persons charged with violating a state criminal statute. It is responsible for the expenses of establishing, maintaining and operating the jail and feeding, clothing, and medically treating the prisoners. Amiss, supra. As such, it is not entitled to reimbursement from a municipality for the housing of persons charged for violating a state criminal statute.

5. Can the Union Parish Detention Center be reimbursed from a
   municipality for the housing of persons arrested by municipal law
   enforcement officers for violating a city or municipal ordinance? If
   so, is there a maximum daily fee which may be charged for housing
   such person?

Page 5

Mr. S. Andrew Shealy
Opinion No. 01-135
Page 5

As discussed previously, the Union Parish Detention Center Commission, because of the language in La. R. S. 15:850.6, must also accept for incarceration those persons charged with violating a municipal ordinance.

6. Can the Union Parish Detention Center seek a percentage of the
   monies received into the criminal court fund or any other fund from
   the payments of fines and costs by persons who plead guilty or are
   convicted of any offense, including traffic offenses, in the Union
   Parish District Court as reimbursement for the housing of inmates in
   the Union Parish Detention Center?

La. R.S. 15:571.11 establishes a criminal court fund for each of the district courts. It provides that all fines and forfeitures imposed by district courts and district attorneys and conviction fees in criminal cases, etc. shall be paid into the treasury of the parish in which the court is situated and deposited in the criminal court fund. Upon a motion by the district attorney and approval of the district judge, the fund may be used to defray expenses of the criminal court of the parish. The statute specifically provides that sheriffs throughout the state shall retain 12% of the amount of fines collected. This amount goes into the particular sheriff’s general fund.

Although the Union Parish Detention Center Commission, by statute, assumes the position of keeper of the Union Parish Detention Center and relieves the Sheriff of Union Parish of that duty, the law does not provide for the Union Parish Detention Center Commission to receive a portion of the monies received by the sheriff pursuant to this statute. The Sheriff of Union Parish is not relieved of all of his duties; he is only relieved of his duty of keeper of the parish jail. La. R.S. 15:571.11 does, however, provide that one half of any surplus remaining in the fund on December 31st of each year shall be transferred to the parish general fund. Thus, the Union Parish Detention Center may seek appropriations of such funds, assuming there are surplus funds remaining at the end of the year, from the criminal court fund since funding for the center is budgeted by Union Parish. Additionally, the Center could seek legislative changes to provide for receipt of a portion of the fines collected and deposited in the criminal court fund.

7. Is there any state law which provides funding to parishes, sheriffs, or
   detention centers for the housing of inmates in facilities in other
   parishes as a result of overcrowding, safety precautions, or other
   similar reasons?

You question the possibility of receiving funding for housing inmates from other parishes due to overcrowding or other safety reasons. La. R.S. 15:706 addresses the transfer of prisoners to a jail of another parish. In sum, it provides that the sheriff of the parish maintaining and keeping a prisoner or prisoners may transfer any prisoner, due to a security or health risk, to the jail of any other

Page 6

Mr. S. Andrew Shealy
Opinion No. 01-135
Page 6

parish by written contract with the sheriff of the other parish. The sheriff to whom the transfer of the prisoner is made shall receive the same compensation authorized by law for the keeping and feeding of prisoners, which shall be paid by the parish transferring the prisoner. Therefore, the Union Parish Detention Center Commission is entitled to be compensated for housing out-of-parish prisoners pursuant to this statute.

We trust that this adequately responds to your request. If you have any questions whatsoever, please do not hesitate to contact our office.

With kindest regards,

Very truly yours,

RICHARD P. IEYOUB
ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY:
TINA VICARI GRANT
Assistant Attorney General
RPI:TVG:crt

Page 7

Mr. S. Andrew Shealy
Opinion No. 01-135
Page 7

OPINION NUMBER 01-135

SYLLABUS

Discussion of Union Parish Detention Center.

La. R.S. 15:850.1, et seq.
La. R.S. 15:704
La. R.S. 15:571.11
La. R.S. 15:706

Mr. S. Andrew Shealy
Assistant District Attorney
Lincoln Parish Office
Post Office Box 777
Ruston, Louisiana 71273-0777

DATE RECEIVED: 03/29/01

DATE RELEASED: June 15, 2001

AUTHOR: TINA VICARI GRANT
Assistant Attorney General