Appeals court upholds former Lafourche councilman's conviction

A state appeals court has affirmed the conviction of a former Lafourche Parish councilman accused of falsifying public records.

The 1st Circuit Court of Appeal in Baton Rouge upheld the conviction and sentence for James Bourgeois, who was convicted in 2018 of falsely declaring he was a resident of his district.

Bourgeois served as the councilman of District 5, which includes Bayou Blue and parts of Pointe-aux-Chenes and Raceland. According to parish law, council candidates must have lived in their respective districts for at least one year prior to the end of the election sign-up period.

More: Louisiana Supreme Court reinstates former Lafourche Parish councilman's conviction

Bourgeois signed up as a candidate Dec. 2, 2015, and indicated in his paperwork he lived at 68 Magnolia St. in Raceland. However, prosecutors alleged he instead used his Raceland home as a “camp,” where he held occasional crawfish boils, parties and other events but always returned to a house in Metairie, in Jefferson Parish.

After Bourgeois was convicted, a judge gave him a suspended three-year sentence and ordered him to serve two years of supervised probation and 200 hours of community service.

Bourgeois appealed the case to the 1st Circuit which found there wasn’t enough evidence to warrant a conviction and reversed the verdict and vacated the sentence.

Lafourche prosecutors requested the state Supreme Court review the case, and that court reinstated Bourgeois’ conviction and sentence in May.

The case then went back to the 1st Circuit, which affirmed the conviction and sentence on Nov. 16.

Bourgeois argued that the law did not require him to remain at one residence in Lafourche after he signed up for the election. He contended that any evidence presented during the trial that involved events occurring after he signed up should not have been admissible.

Also: State Supreme Court hears arguments in case of former Lafourche councilman

Prosecutors argued that the evidence of how Bourgeois lived after Dec. 2, 2015, was relevant to show a “continued pattern of behavior” indicating his ongoing intent to abandon his Lafourche residence.

In its recent decision, the 1st Circuit said the Supreme Court cited evidence that occurred before December 2015 that supported Bourgeois’ conviction.

“Specifically, the court noted the Jefferson Parish registration of defendant’s 2015 truck, defendant’s 2014 Lafourche Parish utility bills, the August 2015 burglary of defendant’s property and his statement to police that ‘he wasn’t living at the house for a while and was thinking about having it demolished,’” the court said.

The appeals court also rejected Bourgeois’ argument that the trial court improperly instructed jurors as to the definition of “domicile.”

During deliberations, the jury asked District Court Judge Steven Miller three times to define “domicile.” Jurors also requested to have that legal definition put in writing but were denied.

A domicile is defined as a place of habitual residence, where the inhabitants intend to remain. A person can have several residences but only one domicile.

The defendant argues that the jury received a confusing definition of the word which led to his conviction.

The appeals court rejected those arguments as well.

“As an initial matter, as acknowledged by defendant, he did not object to the jury instruction on domicile before it was first read,” the court said. “The state filed three proposed instructions regarding domicile with the court on Sept. 10, 2018, the first day of trial. Defendant only contested the language regarding witness credibility and truthfulness. The failure to make a contemporaneous objection to jury instructions waives review of those jury instructions on appeal.”

More: La. Supreme Court agrees to hear former Lafourche councilman's criminal case

Though the jury’s ruling hinged on the meaning of “domicile,” testimony and other evidence during the trial indicated Bourgeois’ intention to remain in Metairie even if he continued to own and visit his Raceland address, the appeals court said.

“As found by the Louisiana Supreme Court, the state presented evidence sufficient to find defendant had purposefully changed his domicile to habitually reside with his second wife and their respective children.”

— Staff Writer Dan Copp can be reached at 448-7639 or at dan.copp@houmatoday.com. Follow him on Twitter @DanVCopp.

This article originally appeared on The Courier: Appeals court upholds former Lafourche councilman's conviction