Judges: RICHARD P. IEYOUB
Filed Date: 2/2/1999
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
Dear Mrs. Brackin:
Your request for an Attorney General's Opinion was forwarded to me for research and reply. As I understand, you have asked the following questions:
1) Does La. R.S.
46:2583 supersede local ordinances regarding handicapped parking?2) Do judges have the authority to reduce the fine provided in La. R.S.
40:1742 ?3) Does a law enforcement official, with the authority to issue parking tickets for handicap violations, violate La. R.S.
40:1742 by failing to do so?
The legislature drafted La. R.S.
B.(1) Each state agency and political subdivision having jurisdiction over state parking, publicly owned and operated parking facilities, public facilities, or public facilities for accommodation shall provide for and enforce a penalty of two hundred seventy-five dollars for persons who park in spaces for the mobility impaired who do not have a license plate for the mobility impaired which contains the word "handicapped" embossed on the license plate or a properly displayed parking card issued pursuant to R.S.
47:463.4 or 463.4.1.
There is no ambiguity in the language of this provision. It clearly sets forth that all entities with the authority to issue parking tickets for handicap parking violations must establish and enforce a $275 fine for such violations. Furthermore, the language *Page 2
specifically includes political subdivisions of the state (such as municipalities), and expressly mandates enforcement of this provision. As such, the wording of this statute is an express preemption of any contrary local or municipal ordinance. Thus, all state agencies and political subdivisions must comply with the $275 fine established in La. R.S.
It is well-established that judges have a great deal of discretion in sentencing within the sentencing guidelines provided in the Code of Criminal Procedure. The issue in your second question, however, is whether the language of La. R.S.
These statutes use the word "shall" in reference to the enforcement of these particular penalties. La. C.Cr.P. art.
5 provides: "The word ``shall' is mandatory, and the word ``may' is permissive." When courts encounter the clear and unambiguous language in a statute, they are bound to apply that statute as written.
Therefore, this opinion concluded, both the $275 fine (La. R.S.
Your third question inquires into the duty of law enforcement officials to enforce La. R.S.
In summary, it is the opinion of this office that all state agencies and political subdivisions with jurisdiction over street parking or publicly owned and operated parking facilities must comply with the mandatory fine and disbursement provisions of La. R.S. *Page 3
I hope that this opinion has adequately addressed your questions. If I may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me. With warmest regards, I am
Sincerely,
RICHARD P. IEYOUB Attorney General
BY: ANN EVANS WALL Assistant Attorney General