Case Name: Ben CARTER v. STATE of Louisiana, CRIME VICTIMS REPARATION BOARD AND FUND
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 2004-10-29
Citations: 897 So. 2d 149
Docket Number: No. 2003 CA 2728
Parties: Ben CARTER v. STATE of Louisiana, CRIME VICTIMS REPARATION BOARD AND FUND.
Judges: Before: WHIPPLE, FITZSIMMONS, and DOWNING, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 897
Pages: 149–155

Head Matter:
Ben CARTER v. STATE of Louisiana, CRIME VICTIMS REPARATION BOARD AND FUND.
No. 2003 CA 2728.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, First Circuit.
Oct. 29, 2004.
C.R. Whitehead, Jr., Natchitoches, Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellant Ben Carter.
Charles C. Foti, Jr., Attorney General, Thomas L. Enright, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Baton Rouge, Counsel for Defendant/Appellee State of Louisiana, Crime Victims Reparation Board and Fund.
Before: WHIPPLE, FITZSIMMONS, and DOWNING, JJ.

Opinion:
J^FITZSIMMONS, J.
Plaintiff, Ben Carter, filed an application for benefits under the Louisiana Crime Victims Reparations Act, La. R.S. 46:1801, et seq. After considering the application and submitted evidence, the Louisiana Crime Victims Reparations Board (board) voted to deny the claim. Mr. Carter was notified of the denial, but chose not to administratively appeal the board's decision. See LAC 22, Part XIII, § 303. Instead, he filed a suit against the board for "Health Care Benefits." The district court found that the matter had prescribed, and dismissed the suit, with prejudice. We vacate the judgment, and dismiss the appeal.
On appeal, Mr. Carter asserts that the board's consideration and denial of his application, without affording him the constitutional due process requirements of notice and hearing, rendered the board's decision null and void. Mr. Carter also relies on various state statutes, including provisions of the Louisiana Administrative Procedures Act (APA), La. R.S. 49:950, et seq., which require notice and a hearing for certain matters; jurisprudence interpreting those articles; and Code of Civil Procedure articles 2002 and 2004, governing the nullity of a judgment.
CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS CLAIM
Similar to the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Louisiana Constitution, Article I, § 2, provides that "[n]o person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, except by due process of law." Fundamentally, procedural due process requires notice of a proceeding and an opportunity to be heard. In re Justice of the Peace Landry, 2001-0657, p. 9 (La.6/29/01), 789 So.2d 1271, 1277. Initially, we must determine whether Mr. Carter's claim for preparations was subject to the constitutional due process protections, which may override other state law provisions.
To claim the protection of constitutional due process, a party must show the existence of some fundamentally protected right, such as a property or liberty interest, that has been adversely affected by state action. However, property interests are not created by the constitution. They are created and defined by existing rules or understandings that stem from an independent source, such as state law, that secure certain benefits and support claims of entitlement to those benefits. To have a property interest protected by due process, a person must clearly have more than an abstract need or desire for the property. He must have a legitimate entitlement to it, not merely a unilateral expectation. American International Gaming Association, Inc. v. Louisiana Riverboat Gaming Commission, 2000-2864, pp. 13-14 (La.App. 1 Cir. 9/11/02), 838 So.2d 5, 16; Hagood v. Pickering, 385 So.2d 405, 408-09 (La.App. 1 Cir.1980). If the property interest would be granted "merely on the applicant meeting certain specified qualifications," due process may be required for a denial of the claim. See Hagood, 385 So.2d at 409. Contrarily, if the determining board or commission has broad discretion to decide whether the public interest is served, the claimed benefit does not rise to the level of an entitlement. Id.
We can find no basis for a claim of clear entitlement to victim reparations. The Louisiana Victims Reparations Act does not require the granting of applications for reparations upon the mere fulfillment of "certain specified qualifications." See Hagood, 385 So.2d at 409. Rather, the act allows the board wide discretion in its decision on awards. Under the law, the board considers the application using a preponderance of the evidence standard of review. La. R.S. 46:1809 A. The initial consideration is whether a pecuniary loss was sustained. Id. Secondly, the board must make ancillary findings, including the victim's level of | cooperation with law enforcement and level of involvement in the crime itself. La. R.S. 46:1809 B. Thus, reparations are a remedy or a benefit granted by the state, but not an entitlement. Absent a protected property interest, a due process notice and hearing were not required. See Hagood, 385 So.2d at 409.
STATUTORY STATE LAW CLAIMS
The APA does not supersede more specific, applicable provisions of law. "Rather, it was intended to create procedures in those instances where none exist." Metro Riverboat Associates, Inc. v. Louisiana Gaming Control Board, 2001-0185, p. 9 (La.10/16/01), 797 So.2d 656, 662. The Crime Victims Reparations Act provides its own procedures for the implementation of hearings. La. R.S. 46:1809 A. The question of whether to hold a hearing is left to the discretion of the board. See La. R.S. 46:1808 A & 1809 A.
After the board makes a decision, it is "subject to review in accordance with the provisions of [the APA]." La. R.S. 46:1812. The APA provides for judicial review of the validity and applicability of agency rules. It also provides judicial review from "a final decision or order in an adjudication proceeding . " La. R.S. 49:964 A(l) and 49:963; see Metro Riverboat Associates, Inc., 2001-0185 at p. 9, 797 So.2d at 662. For purposes of the APA, an "adjudication" is defined as the "agency process for the formulation of a decision or order." La. R.S. 49:951(1). A "'[d]ecision' or 'order' means the whole or any part of the final disposition . of any agency, in any matter other than rulemak-ing, required by constitution or statute to be determined on the record after notice and opportunity for an agency hearing . " La. R.S. 49:951(3) (Emphasis added.); see Metro Riverboat Associates, Inc., 2001-0185 at p. 9 n. 7, 797 So.2d at 662 n. 7. Under La. R.S. 46:1808 A and 1809 A, a hearing is not required for every application for reparations.
[ Jn this case, the law did not require notice and hearing, and the board chose not to hold a hearing. Thus, in the absence of a statutorily required notice and hearing, the board's decision to deny the application did not meet the APA's definition of an order or decision subject to judicial review. See La. R.S. 49:951(3); Metro Riverboat Associates, Inc., 2001-0185 at p. 9 n. 7, 797 So.2d at 662 n. 7.
Further, in the absence of a right to judicial review, neither the trial court nor an appellate court has jurisdiction to rule on the merits of the reparations claim. This court's jurisdiction extends only to correcting the trial court's error in entertaining the suit. See Metro Riverboat Associates, Inc., 2001-0185 at p. 10, 797 So.2d at 663.
For these reasons, we vacate the judgment of the district court and dismiss the appeal. The costs of the appeal are assessed to appellant, Mr. Carter.
JUDGMENT VACATED, AND APPEAL DISMISSED.
DOWNING, J., concurs in part and dissents in part and assigns reasons.
WHIPPLE, J., concurs in the result for the reasons assigned by J. DOWNING.
. Mr. Carter died approximately six months after suit was filed. Just prior to the rendition of the appealed judgment, Mrs. Jean Carter, the administratrix of the Succession of Ben Carter, was substituted as the proper plaintiff.