Louisiana’s criminal justice system is facing a major procedural shift and, so far, no one seems prepared for it. On June 8, 2025, Governor Jeff Landry signed Act No. 194, a bill originally marketed as a way to “increase penalties” for misdemeanor Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) offenses. But by raising the maximum fines for first and second offense OWIs, lawmakers unintentionally crossed a constitutional threshold: defendants now have a right to a jury trial in misdemeanor OWI cases.
This change has enormous implications for court dockets, prosecutor workloads, and local government budgets. What was once a high-volume misdemeanor process handled by judges in quick bench trials has now become full-blown jury litigation, with all the complexity and cost that comes with it.
To evaluate how District Attorney Offices across the state were responding to this sudden expansion of jury-trial rights, we issued a Public Records Request to all 42 elected District Attorneys. We specifically requested:
Copies of all written policies, protocols, procedures, guidelines, memoranda, internal communications, or training materials that address how billing for Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) misdemeanor cases is to be handled since the recent change in applicable law 2025 La. Sess. Law Serv. Act 194 (H.B. 403), effective June 8, 2025.
This was not a request for legal positions or case strategy. It was a request for administrative preparation, the kind of internal guidance any office would need before handling hundreds of new jury trials. We received responses from the overwhelming majority of District Attorney Offices. Only the following parishes failed to respond: East Feliciana and West Feliciana; Livingston, St. Helena, and Tangipahoa; St. Bernard; and, Caldwell.
Across all offices that responded, the result was unanimous: Not a single District Attorney Office in Louisiana has created a written policy, protocol, or administrative procedure for handling misdemeanor OWI jury trials under Act 194.
No guidelines.
No billing procedures.
No internal memos.
No training materials.
The statewide policy vacuum is striking, especially given that Act 194 took effect five months ago, and OWI cases account for some of the highest misdemeanor volumes in the state.
The absence of administrative planning raises serious questions:
• How will DA Offices budget for jury costs in high-volume OWI jurisdictions?
• How will courts manage the sudden increase in jury demands?
• What happens to pending cases where defendants now have rights the system is not equipped to provide?
For defendants, Act 194 represents a powerful expansion of constitutional protection.
For prosecutors and courts, it represents a logistical challenge for which no one appears ready.
As more defendants begin asserting their newly triggered jury-trial rights, District Attorney Offices will eventually have to confront the reality of Act 194.
Until then, the message is clear: Louisiana changed the law, but the system has not changed with it.