author: PER CURIAM.

text:
    CITY OF LAFAYETTE v. Darrell D. DESORMEAUX.
    No. 2006-KP-1730.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 2007.
    Laborde & Neuner, James L. Pate, Jed Michael Mestayer, Lafayette, for applicant.
    The Law Office of Lawrence C. Billeaud, Lawrence Charles Billeaud; Charles C. Foti, Jr., Attorney General, Michael Har-son, District Attorney, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

|/The City of Lafayette (City) charged defendant and his daughter, Michelle De-sormeaux, in separate affidavits, with resisting an officer in violation of Lafayette City Ordinance, § 62-66. The ordinance defines the offense, similarly to its state counterpart, LSA-R.S. 14:108, as “the intentional opposition or resistance to, or obstruction of, an individual acting in his official capacity and authorized by law to make a lawful arrest.” The City additionally charged Michelle Desormeaux with violation of Lafayette City Ordinance, § 86-5, which prohibits the playing of music in a vehicle at excessive sound levels plainly audible at a distance of 50 feet in any direction. The city court found Ms. Desor-meaux not guilty of violating the sound ordinance, but found both father and daughter guilty as charged of resisting an officer and sentenced each defendant to 30 days in jail. The court suspended the sentences and placed the Desormeauxs on unsupervised probation. The court also fined each defendant $170.00.

| ¿The Desormeauxs appealed their convictions and sentences to the Fifteenth Judicial District Court in accord with the provisions of LSA-R.S. 13:1896(B). That court affirmed as to each defendant and the Desormeauxs thereafter filed separate applications for review in the court of appeal. The third circuit consolidated the applications and affirmed as to Michelle Desormeaux, but reversed her father’s conviction and sentence on grounds of insufficient evidence. City of Lafayette v. Desormeaux, 06-0460 (La.App. 3 Cir. 6/7/06) (Cooks, J. dissenting as to Michelle Desormeaux, but concurring as to Darrell Desormeaux; Pickett, J., concurring as to Michelle Desormeaux, but dissenting as to Darrell Desormeaux.).

This court denied the Desormeauxs’ application for review, City of Lafayette v. Desormeaux, 06-1710 (La.4/27/07), 955 So.2d 675, but granted the City’s application. City of Lafayette v. Desormeaux, 06-1730 (La.4/27/07), 955 So.2d 670. We reverse the judgment of the court of appeal as to Darrell Desormeaux, agreeing with the City that the evidence at trial supported the trial court’s guilty verdict. The trial court found that defendant directly challenged the effort by the police officers to take unquestioned command of the situation after arresting his recalcitrant daughter for traffic violations; he thereby committed the offense of resisting an officer as defined by city and state law.

The arrests of the Desormeauxs stemmed from a traffic stop initiated by Lafayette city police officer Kyle Moreau shortly after midnight on August 24, 2004, when he' stopped Michelle Desormeaux, who was driving a Hummer SUV, for violating the city’s sound ordinance. Officer Moreau’s attention had been drawn to the vehicle when he heard heavy bass tones and loud music spilling out of the opened windows of the vehicle as it passed him in the opposite lane of traffic. The officer initially intended to issue only a citation for the sound violation, and for a second 1 ^traffic offense after he discovered that Ms. Desormeaux did not have her driver’s license in her possession.

At first, Ms. Desormeaux appeared fully cooperative. According to the officer, she apologized for the loud music and informed him that she had left her license with a friend in a nearby club. At the officer’s request, and with one of her passengers taking the wheel of the vehicle, Ms. Desor-meaux relocated to the nearby club in an effort to retrieve her license so that Officer Moreau could identify her properly and issue the citations.

However, the stop quickly escalated into an arrest when Ms. Desormeaux ignored the officer’s repeated instructions to step from her vehicle, informed the officer that she was speaking to her attorney, and then continued to talk with her father, an attorney in Lafayette, on her cellular phone. After Officer Moreau finally got her out of the vehicle, Ms. Desormeaux tried to slip past him and then struggled with him as he attempted to place her in handcuffs. Aided by Corporal Delahoussay, who had arrived on the scene in a back-up capacity, Officer Moreau handcuffed Ms. Desor-meaux and then transported her to the Lafayette Correctional Center.

When Officer Moreau arrived at the Correctional Center, he opened the door of his patrol unit to remove Ms. Desormeaux. The officer immediately discovered that she had slipped out of the handcuffs in a fashion that he could not explain at trial. Before he could give her any instructions, Ms. Desormeaux jumped out of the unit and attempted to squeeze past him and escape. At the moment Officer Moreau restrained her, defendant arrived on the scene and moved rapidly toward his daughter, yelling at the officer and demanding to know why he was arresting her.

Corporal Delahoussaye, who had followed Officer Moreau to the Correctional Center, stepped in front of defendant to cut him off and ordered him to stay back as |4Moreau struggled to recuff Ms. Desor-meaux. The officer finally secured the. handcuffs as both he and Corporal Dela-houssaye warned defendant to stand back. Instead, defendant continued to yell at the officers and even at his own daughter while demanding the reason for her arrest.

Concerned that Corporal Delahoussaye could not restrain defendant for much longer, Officer Moreau turned his attention momentarily away from Ms. Desor-meaux to focus on her father and then turned back to make sure that her hands were still cuffed. However, Ms. Desor-meaux had slipped her left hand out of the cuffs and once more attempted to escape. Officer Moreau restrained her again and placed her on the hood of a patrol unit to recuff her loose hand. Corporal Delahous-saye came to his aid as defendant circled around the patrol unit and moved rapidly toward the officers, approaching within an arm’s length.

At that moment, Narcotics Agent George Crowder, who had observed the events at Moreau’s patrol unit unfold from the steps of the Correctional Center, intervened by grabbing defendant’s arm and warning him that he would be arrested if he did not stay back. When the defendant, who was still upset and yelling, tiled to walk past him towards his daughter, Agent Crowder placed the defendant against the police car. He then turned defendant over to city police officers who placed him under arrest.

• Glenn Armentor, an acquaintance of the defendant, testified for the defense concerning the defendant’s reputation for veracity and non-violence. Michelle Desor-meaux, the defendant’s daughter, denied resisting the officers and claimed that the officers threw her around to make it appear that she was struggling. She also testified that the handcuffs simply slipped off her wrists.

^Defendant testified that when his daughter informed him by phone that the police were attempting to remove her from her vehicle, he instructed her to cooperate with the officers. He then drove to the jail and approached Corporal Delahous-saye, who immediately instructed him to stay back. He identified himself as Michelle’s father and her attorney and asked what was going on. The officers eventually informed him that they were arresting his daughter. He then noticed that his daughter was out of her handcuffs. When the officers slammed her against the hood of a car, the defendant told the officers that their behavior was “brutality.” He was then arrested as he was walking toward the bonding office. According to the defendant, he did not interfere with his daughter’s arrest and further testified that he knew better than to approach the officer who was in the process of handcuffing his daughter.

Portions of the incident were .captured on a small tape recorder taken to the scene of Ms. Desormeaux’s arrest by Corporal Delahoussaye and then given to Officer Moreau before he transported defendant’s daughter to the Correctional Center. The tape was then transferred to a compact disc and introduced at trial. The copy of the recording submitted with defendant’s application is frequently inaudible, but it does capture the chaotic events at the Correctional Center. Defendant can be heard shouting at the officers as he demanded the reasons for his daughter’s arrest even while instructing Ms. Desormeaux to keep quiet. The officers can be heard responding to those demands by ordering defendant to step back from them while they attended to his recalcitrant daughter.

In reasons for judgment delivered extemporaneously from the bench and later reduced to writing, the city judge found that the evidence did not support a finding beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Desor-meaux had violated Lafayette’s sound ordinance; it remained unclear from Officer Moreau’s testimony just how far away | /rom her vehicle he was when he heard the loud music. The court accordingly acquitted her of that charge.

However, the court found that Officer Moreau had had probable cause to believe that she had violated the ordinance. The officer was entitled to make a full custodial arrest for the violation, despite the fact that a first violation of the ordinance is punished by fine only, and Lafayette Police Chief Randy Hundley testified that official police policy called for only a citation if the driver has a license and proper identification. The court explicitly relied on the decision in Atwater v. City of Lago Vista, 532 U.S. 318, 121 S.Ct. 1536, 149 L.Ed.2d 549 (2001) (Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the police from making a warrantless arrest for misdemeanor offenses even when they do not involve breaches of the peace.); cf. LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 213(1) (Police officer may make a war-rantless arrest for a misdemeanor offense committed in his presence.); LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 933(4) (A “misdemeanor” offense includes violation of an ordinance providing a penal sanction.). To the extent that Ms. Desormeaux was then “bound and determined to make it as difficult as possible for the Officers to do them jobs,” the court found her guilty of resisting an officer. As for her father, the court observed that it was clear that “the prescription [sic] against resisting arrest of someone else is to prevent the Officers from getting hurt because they might be distracted by someone else.... [W]hat someone cannot do when an Officer is in the process of arresting someone is distract them. And, that is precisely what Mr. Desormeaux did.”

In its brief order reversing that verdict, the court of appeal relied, without discussion, on the decision in State v. Patterson, 98-2643 (La.App. 4 Cm. 3/29/00), 758 So.2d 955. However, that reliance was misplaced. In Patterson, an apparently intoxicated defendant ignored repeated orders by the officers on the scene to step 17away and keep out of the area and persisted in his attempts to converse with two individuals who had been arrested and placed in the back of a patrol unit. The officers finally detained the defendant, searched him, and found cocaine. On defendant’s appeal of his subsequent conviction and sentence for possession of cocaine, the fourth circuit found that the officers had at least reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop for the offense of resisting an officer under LSA-R.S. 14:108 because defendant’s actions interfered with or obstructed the arrests of the two men in custody in the back of the patrol unit. “While defendant was only observed attempting to talk to the arrested subjects, his actions interfered with the officer’s overall arrest operation in that the officers had to focus them attentions on defendant, rather than the arrest scene, to ensure the continued safe custody of both the arrested subjects and themselves.” Patterson, 98-2643 at 8, 758 So.2d at 961. Patterson specifically rejected the argument that an individual cannot obstruct or interfere with an arrest which has already taken place. “To hold that a person interferes 'with or obstructs an officer making a lawful arrest only when the individual acts at the precise moment police take the person into custody, or immediately prior thereto- — after officers have probable cause — as suggested by defendant, is a hyper-technical and unrealistic interpretation of the statute.” Id. Nevertheless, the court of appeal concluded that the officers did not have an objective basis for suspecting that defendant presented a danger to them and thus lacked a lawful basis for frisking him and then reaching into his pockets to retrieve the cocaine. Patterson, 98-2643 at 11, 758 So.2d at 962.

We disagreed with that aspect of the court of appeal’s decision and reversed accordingly. State v. Patterson, 00-1212 (La.3/28/01), 783 So.2d 1243. This court fully subscribed to the trial court’s premise that the officers had lawfully detained Isdefendant for the offense of resisting an officer. Patterson, 00-1212 at 1, 783 So.2d at 1243-44. (“Respondent’s conduct interfered with the arrests and constituted a violation of La. R.S. 14:108 (resisting an officer) ... [the] gravamen of [which] ... ‘remains the intentional obstruction of an officer acting in his official capacity.’ ”) (quoting State v. Huguet, 369 So.2d 1331, 1334 (La.1979)).

In the present case, the city court explicitly resolved the credibility choice in favor of Officer Moreau and Corporal De-lahoussaye. On that basis, the court found that defendant had repeatedly disobeyed the officers’ orders to step away while they struggled to maintain custody of his daughter on the way to booking in the Correctional Center; he thereby posed a danger to the officers by drawing their attention away from his daughter as she exercised her unusual skill at slipping out of her handcuffs. Cf. State ex rel. Graffagnino v. King, 436 So.2d 559, 563 (La.1983) (An appellate court may not second guess rational credibility determinations made by the factfinder.). The city court drew on the testimony of Officer Moreau that they were already dealing with Ms. Desor-meaux who was resisting when defendant came into their immediate area and forced them to direct attention toward him rather than dealing with the matter at hand, which was trying to secure the daughter in handcuffs. Although Officer Moreau had already arrested Ms. Desormeaux before transporting her to the Correctional Center, he had not yet fully succeeded in subduing her by the time defendant arrived on the scene. She continued her efforts to escape and to frustrate the officers’ attempts to restrain her by the use of handcuffs. It clearly appeal's from the officers’ testimony that Ms. Desormeaux took advantage of the | ^distraction provided by her father to slip one hand out of the cuffs and to make her third attempt to elude custody.

In making an arrest, for their own safety and that of their suspect, the police may take reasonable steps to assert complete command of the situation. Brendlin v. California, — U.S. -, -, 127 S.Ct. 2400, 2407, 168 L.Ed.2d 132 (2007) (“[A] sensible person would not expect a police officer to allow people to come and go freely from the physical focal point of an investigation into faulty behavior or wrongdoing.”); Michigan v. Summers, 452 U.S. 692, 702-703, 101 S.Ct. 2587, 2594, 69 L.Ed.2d 340 (1981) (“The risk of harm to both the police and [the persons they detain] is minimized if the officers routinely exercise unquestioned command of the situation.”); accord State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 5 (La.11/29/06), 943 So.2d 335, 338 (Trial court erred in granting a motion to suppress because it failed to accord due deference to the need of the police to exercise unquestioned command of the situation while they determined the nature and scope of the criminal activity they had uncovered.). In the present case, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the evidence supports the verdict of the city court that by interfering with the effort of Officer Moreau and Corporal De-lahoussaye to reestablish custody over his recalcitrant daughter, defendant committed the offense of resisting an officer as defined by state and city law.

Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeal is reversed as to defendant, his conviction and sentence are reinstated, and this case is remanded to the city court for purposes of rendering that sentence execu-tory.

JkjCOURT OF APPEAL REVERSED; CONVICTION AND SENTENCE REINSTATED; CASE REMANDED.

      . See California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621, 624, 111 S.Ct. 1547, 1550, 113 L.Ed.2d 690 (1991) ("[A]n officer effects an arrest of a person whom he has authority to arrest, by laying his hand on him for the purpose of arresting him, though he may not succeed in stopping and holding him.”). (Internal quotation marks and citation omitted.)

      . See Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) (When considering a claim of insufficient evidence, a reviewing court must determine whether, after viewing the evidence in light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.).


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    In re Jesse Clarence BROWN.
    No. 2007-B-0995.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 17, 2007.

      Charles Bennett Plattsmier, Bernadine Johnson, Baton Rouge, for Applicant.
    Francis Brian Mulhall, Metairie, Jesse Clarence Brown, for Respondent.
   | ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM.

This disciplinary matter arises from formal charges filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) against respondent, Jesse Clarence Brown, an attorney licensed to practice law in Louisiana.

UNDERLYING FACTS

On October 8, 1996, Terry Jones and her eleven-year old son, Christopher Jones, were involved in an automobile accident in Jefferson Parish. Shortly thereafter, Ms. Jones retained respondent to represent her and Christopher in a suit for damages arising out of the accident. On October 8, 1997, respondent filed suit on behalf of his clients, naming as defendants Allstate Indemnity Company and its insured, Robert Veal. Terry Jones, individually and on behalf of Christopher Jones v. Robert Veal and Allstate Indem. Co., No. 515-602 on the docket of the 24th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Jefferson. In the original petition, respondent instructed the clerk of court to withhold service on the defendants. Respondent then filed an amended petition on October 1, 1998 in which he requested service on the defendants; however, the defendants were not served. On January 31, 2003, respondent sent a letter to the clerk of court requesting that service be reissued on the defendant Allstate. Respondent took no further action of record in the case.

| ¿The defendants were finally served on February 13, 2003. On March 18, 2003, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss, asserting that the plaintiffs had not requested service of process within ninety days of commencement of the action, as required by La.Code Civ. P. art. 1201(C). The trial court set the defendants’ motion for hearing on May 28, 2003. The suit record reflects that over a two-week period, the Sheriffs Office made eight attempts to serve respondent with notice of the hearing, but on each occasion, it was noted that respondent’s office was “closed.” As a result of the inability to serve respondent, the trial court was forced to continue the hearing, and the motion to dismiss has apparently never been ruled upon.

In November 2004, Ms. Jones and Christopher filed a disciplinary complaint against respondent, alleging that he periodically assured them he was working on their case, but after 2000, they were unable to reach him to discuss the status of the matter. Ms. Jones further reported that she contacted Allstate in August 2004 and was informed that the case was considered abandoned. Ms. Jones attempted to contact respondent after receiving this information, but she was unsuccessful in reaching him.

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

Following its investigation, the ODC filed one count of formal charges against respondent, alleging that his conduct in the Jones matter violated the following provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct: Rules 1.1(a) (failure to provide competent representation to a client), 1.3 (failure to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client), 1.4 (failure to communicate with a client), 3.2 (failure to make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation), and 8.4(c) (engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation). Respondent | nanswered the formal charges and denied any misconduct. This matter then proceeded to a formal hearing on the merits.

Hearing Committee Report

Considering the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, the hearing committee made a factual finding that respondent failed to diligently, expeditiously, and competently pursue his clients’ personal injury case. In the nine years since the filing of the original petition for damages, respondent forwarded (but did not file) one piece of discovery and received medical records. He did not take any depositions, never interviewed the doctors who performed surgery on Christopher Jones, and never filed a motion to withdraw. The committee found it is irrelevant whether the injuries to Terry Jones and Christopher Jones were minor or not; respondent undertook the representation and failed to pursue it diligently, expeditiously, and competently. The committee expressly noted that it made no finding whether the Jones case was abandoned or whether the defendants’ motion to dismiss has merit. Based on these factual findings, the committee determined that respondent violated Rules 1.1(a), 1.3, and 3.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

The committee further found there is insufficient evidence to support the ODC’s allegation that respondent failed to communicate with his clients. Respondent testified that he had computer records indicating that he had received, and subsequently returned, at least 158 telephone calls pertaining to the Jones case. Ms. Jones did not testify at the hearing, and although her son did testify, he acknowledged that he was eleven years old when the accident occurred and that his mother had handled virtually all of the communications with respondent after he was retained. | Jn addition, the committee found no evidence was presented to support the ODC’s allegation that respondent engaged in any dishonest or deceitful conduct. Based on these factual findings, the committee recommended that the alleged violations of Rules 1.4 and 8.4(c) be dismissed.

The only aggravating factor recognized by the committee was respondent’s prior disciplinary record; however, the committee found this factor was mitigated by respondent’s “lengthy practice of law with no other disciplinary violations.”

Under these circumstances, the committee recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for three months.

Respondent filed an objection to the hearing committee’s report and recommendation.

Disciplinary Board Recommendation

The disciplinary board found the hearing committee’s factual findings are not manifestly erroneous and adopted same. After reviewing the evidence in the record, the board made the following determinations regarding rule violations:

Rules 1.1(a), 1.3, and 3.2 have been violated. Over a period of three years or longer, respondent failed to ensure that parties were timely served, that an answer was timely filed, and that basic discovery was conducted. Such conduct demonstrates a failure to act competently, a failure to expedite litigation, and neglect of the legal matter.

Rule 1.4 has not been violated. Respondent testified that his computer records revealed he had in excess of 158 telephone calls regarding the Jones case. Although respondent’s reference to these records does not in and of itself establish that the I,-,client was kept informed concerning the October 8, 1996 accident, there is no sworn reliable testimony to weigh against respondent’s sworn testimony. Christopher Jones testified that his mother, Terry Jones, took the lead in contacting respondent as he was a child in the early years of the case. Ms. Jones did not testify at the hearing due to her hospitalization. Respondent testified that his computer “crashed” and he was unable to retrieve a printout of the phone records for the hearing. Accordingly, the board found the ODC failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that respondent did not keep Ms. Jones informed about the personal injury case.

Rule 8.4(c) has not been violated. Without Ms. Jones’ testimony regarding the substance of her communications with respondent, there is no proof in the record that he misled her about the case. All that is in the record is Ms. Jones’ unsworn complaint that she “was not able to get good information showing that [respondent] was working the case” and that she called Allstate only to be told that the case was considered abandoned. Ms. Jones’ unsworn statement cannot carry the same weight as respondent’s sworn testimony that he had not misled her.

The board found that respondent violated duties owed to his clients, and that he acted knowingly. Respondent allowed the Jones case to languish indefinitely during the seven years that the case was under his exclusive control. The board also found that he failed to timely request service of the petition for damages and failed to move the case forward. As a result, the Joneses appear to have lost their day in court. The baseline sanction for respondent’s misconduct is a period of suspension.

According to the board, the record supports the following aggravating factors: prior disciplinary offenses, vulnerability of the victims, and substantial experience in the practice of law (admitted 1988). In mitigation, the board recognized that respondent’s prior discipline is remote in time.

| r,The board observed that prior cases involving misconduct similar to respondent’s have generally resulted in a one year and one day suspension from the practice of law. However, the term of the suspension has been adjusted to account for the number of counts involved and the aggravating and mitigating factors present. Concluding that under the instant facts, the three-month suspension recommended by the hearing committee is appropriate, the board recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for three months. The board also recommended that respondent be assessed with all costs of these proceedings.

Respondent filed an objection to the disciplinary board’s recommendation. Accordingly, the case was docketed for oral argument pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 11(G)(1)(b).

DISCUSSION

Bar disciplinary matters fall within the original jurisdiction of this court. La. Const. art. V, § 5(B). Consequently, we act as triers of fact and conduct an independent review of the record to determine whether the alleged misconduct has been proven by clear and convincing evidence. In re: Quaid, 94-1316 (La.11/30/94), 646 So.2d 343; Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Boutall, 597 So.2d 444 (La.1992). While we are not bound in any way by the findings and recommendations of the hearing committee and disciplinary board, we have held the manifest error standard is applicable to the committee’s factual findings. See In re: Caulfield, 96-1401 (La.11/25/96), 683 So.2d 714; In re: Pardue, 93-2865 (La.3/11/94), 633 So.2d 150.

Respondent failed to competently handle the Jones matter, neglected the personal injury suit, and failed to expedite the litigation consistent with the interests _Jjof his clients. Both the hearing committee and the disciplinary board determined that this conduct violated Rules 1.1(a), 1.3, and 3.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct. These rule violations are supported by the record.

Having found evidence of professional misconduct, we now turn to a determination of the appropriate sanction for respondent’s actions. In determining a sanction, we are mindful that disciplinary proceedings are designed to maintain high standards of conduct, protect the public, preserve the integrity of the profession, and deter future misconduct. Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Reis, 513 So.2d 1173 (La.1987). The discipline to be imposed depends upon the facts of each case and the seriousness of the offenses involved considered in light of any aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Louisiana State Bar Ass’n v. Whittington, 459 So.2d 520 (La.1984).

The question of when ordinary legal malpractice becomes an ethical violation is somewhat unclear. Strictly speaking, virtually any time an attorney allows his client’s case to prescribe or to become abandoned, it could be said the attorney lacks competence in violation of Rule 1.1 and failed to act with diligence in violation of Rule 1.3. However, as a practical matter, disciplinary sanctions are not always appropriate in every instance in which an attorney commits minor violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct. In re: Hartley, 03-2828 (La.4/2/04), 869 So.2d 799. When significant discipline has been imposed in this context, the cases typically involve situations in which the malpractice is combined with additional misconduct, such as where the attorney acts with deceit or misrepresents facts in an effort to conceal the malpractice from the client. See, e.g., In re: Blanson, 05-2561 (La.6/2/06), 930 So.2d 943 (attorney suspended for three years for allowing a suit to Isbecome abandoned and falsely assuring the client the suit was still pending when it had been dismissed).

The instant case does not involve any elements of deceit or misrepresentation. To the contrary, we find respondent’s actions were not the product of an evil or dishonest motive, nor did they cause any actual harm. Under the totality of the circumstances, we believe the matter would be more appropriately considered in a civil malpractice action rather than a disciplinary proceeding.

Nonetheless, we are cognizant that the ODC has proved disciplinary violations by clear and convincing evidence. In light of the presence of aggravating factors, particularly respondent’s prior disciplinary record, we will impose a public reprimand upon respondent, cautioning him to be more diligent in attending to his client’s legal matters in the future.

DECREE

Upon review of the findings and recommendations of the hearing committee and disciplinary board, and considering the record, briefs, and oral argument, it is ordered that Jesse Clarence Brown, Louisiana Bar Roll No. 18570, be publicly reprimanded. All costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days from the date of finality of this court’s judgment until paid.

KIMBALL, J., dissents for reasons assigned by TRAYLOR, J.

TRAYLOR, J., dissents and would impose discipline recommended by the Board and Hearing Commission.

      . Among other witnesses, Christopher Jones testified before the hearing committee; however, Terry Jones was hospitalized in a rehabilitation facility recovering from surgery to remove a brain tumor, and thus she was unavailable to testify in person at the hearing.

      . In 1994, respondent was admonished by the disciplinary board for entering into an improper business transaction with a client and issuing a worthless check to his client, in violation of Rules 1.8 and 8.4(c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

      . In reaching the conclusion that respondent violated the disciplinary rules, we need not decide whether the Jones case is abandoned as a matter of law or whether respondent failed to timely serve the petition as required by the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure.


text:
    In re Christopher D. MATCHETT.
    No. 2007-B-2115.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 31, 2007.
   In re Matchett, Christopher D.; Disciplinary Counsel; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Joint Petition for Transfer to Interim Suspension by Consent.

ORDER

Considering the Joint Petition for Interim Suspension filed by respondent, Christopher D. Matchett, and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel,

IT IS ORDERED that Christopher D. Matchett, Louisiana Bar Roll number 8444, be and he hereby is suspended from the practice of law on an interim basis pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 19.3, pending further orders of this court. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 26(E), this order is effective immediately.

/s/ Catherine D. Kimball Justice, Supreme Court of Louisiana


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Anthony W. DODSON.
    No. 2007-K-0057.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 2, 2007.
   PER CURIAM.

11 Granted. The decision of the court of appeal is reversed and defendant’s conviction and sentence are reinstated. In vacating defendant’s conviction, the court of appeal found that the trial court failed to apprise defendant adequately of his right to confront his accusers when it informed him that by entering a plea of guilty he was waiving his right to have his attorney “examine the D.A.’s witnesses during the course of trial.” State v. Dodson, 41,415 (La.App. 2nd Cir. 10/16/06), 942 So.2d 579 (reh’g den’d 12/7/06)(Brown, C.J., to grant reh’g). The court of appeal panel relied on the Second Circuit’s earlier decision in State v. Mendenhall, 40,986 (La.App. 2nd Cir.5/19/06), 930 So.2d 1196 (advice that defendant was waiving his right to cross-examine the state’s witnesses did not adequately apprise defendant of his right of confrontation) (Brown, C.J., dissenting). However, this Court subsequently reversed that decision and thereby reaffirmed that neither Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969), nor the Court’s implementation of Boykin in State ex rel. Jackson v. Henderson, 260 La. 90, 255 So.2d 85 (1971), sets out a “ ‘magic word formula’ ” which may “ ‘serve as a technical trap for inquiry into the validity of the plea....’” State v. Mendenhall, 06-1407, p. 1 (La.12/8/06), 944 So.2d 560 (quoting State v. Bowick, 403 So.2d 673, 675 (La.1981)). See also State v. Smallwood, 06-2363 (La.5/18/06), 955 So.2d 1264. In the present case, while the trial court failed to advise defendant during the guilty plea colloquy that he was waiving his right to cross-examination of the state’s witnesses by entering a guilty plea, the minutes of the court show that defendant was present with counsel for the hearing on his motion to suppress during which counsel cross-examined two police officers. In this context, the trial court’s advice to defendant, who was 45 years old at the time of the plea colloquy and possesses a G.E.D., that he waived his right to examine the witnesses against him at trial by entering a guilty plea adequately informed him of his right of confrontation and cross-examination at trial. Mendenhall, 06-1407 at 1, 944 So.2d at 560 (“The main and essential purpose of confrontation is to secure for the opponent the opportunity of cross-examination.”)(internal quotation marks and citations omitted).


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Ronald O. CLESI.
    No. 2007-K-0564.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 2, 2007.
   PER CURIAM.

| granted. The court of appeal erred in vacating defendant’s habitual offender adjudication and sentence on grounds that he carried his burden under this Court’s decision in State v. Shelton, 621 So.2d 769 (La.1993), of showing an infringement of his rights in the taking of the guilty pleas. The appellate court specifically noted that the minutes introduced by the state at the habitual offender hearing to prove three of the prior convictions, although attesting in a general manner that defendant received his constitutional rights before entering his guilty pleas, did not indicate that defendant “was informed of each, of his Boykin rights.” State v. Clesi, 06-1250, pp. 9-10 (La.App. 1st Cir.2/14/07), 959 So.2d 957, 963-64 (emphasis added).

In Shelton, this Court held that once the state carries its initial burden at an habitual offender hearing of proving the existence of a defendant’s prior guilty pleas and his representation by counsel or waiver of counsel, the burden shifts to the defendant “to produce some affirmative evidence showing an infringement of l2his rights or a procedural irregularity in the taking of the plea.” Shelton, 621 So.2d at 779. This aspect of Shelton has been incorporated in La.R.S. 15:529.1(D)(1)(b), 1993 La. Acts 896, which provides that a defendant who has alleged a constitutional deficiency in one or more of his prior convictions “shall have the burden of proof, by a preponderance of the evidence, on any issue of fact raised by [his] response [to the state’s habitual offender bill.].” Defendant “can attempt to meet his burden of production with a transcript, with testimony regarding the taking of the plea, or with other affirmative evidence.” Shelton, 621 So.2d at 779, n. 24 (emphasis added). The state’s own documentary evidence introduced to prove the fact of conviction may also satisfy the defendant’s burden of production if it affirmatively reveals a Boy-kin defect in the proceedings. See State v. Townsend, 04-0005, p. 1 (La.4/23/04), 874 So.2d 152, 153 (“We assume for present purposes that the court of appeal correctly found that the documentary evidence introduced by the state at the habitual offender hearing to cany its initial burden under [Shelton] also earned the defendant’s burden to make an ‘affirmative showing’ of a procedural defect in his guilty plea in Texas because the documents omitted any mention of advice with respect to the privilege against self-incrimination.”).

In the present ease, the defendant’s pro se written response and objection to the state’s habitual offender bill stated that “he was not properly Boykin-ized at the hearing by which the alleged predicate convictions were obtained.” He renewed that objection at the hearing. However, defendant’s pre-hearing and mid-hearing objections did not constitute “affirmative evidence ” of a defect in any of his prior guilty pleas. As applied to his habitual offender proceedings by Shelton, the presumption of regularity which attached to the minutes of his prior guilty pleas |smeant that the trial court could assume defendant received advice with respect to each of his Boykin rights until he proved otherwise.

The decision of the court of appeal is therefore reversed, defendant’s adjudication and sentence as a fourth offender are reinstated, and this case is remanded to the trial court for execution of sentence.


text:
    ANR PIPELINE COMPANY et al. v. LOUISIANA TAX COMMISSION.
    No. 2007-CC-2138.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 7, 2007.
   In re ANR Pipeline Company et al.; Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.; Southern Natural Gas Co.; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 468,417 & Consolidated Cases; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 2119.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Reese SIMS.
    No. 2007-KD-2171.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 8, 2007.
   In re Sims, Reese; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. D, No. 471-577; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-K-1448.

Stay denied. Writ denied.


text:
    Darryl SAMAHA, Husband of/and Karman Samaha v. David J. RAU, M.D.
    No. 2007-C-1726.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Rau, David J. M.D.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 137,950; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CA 1561.

Granted.

JOHNSON, J., would deny.


text:
    In re APPEAL OF DECISION OF THE DISCIPLINARY Board NO. 06-PDB-066.
    No. 2006-OB-2459.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Smith, James L.; Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s Order dated August 24, 2007 and October 5, 2007; Appeal of Decision of the Disciplinary Board No. 06-PDB-066.

Second application for reconsideration not considered. Judgment of August 24, 2007 is final. See La.Code Civ. P. Ait. 2167. No further filings shall be accepted in this matter.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Gregory MASON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-2927.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Mason, Gregory; — Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated September 28, 2007, Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court, No. 8-00-0199; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit No. 2006-KW-1492.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    Arthur Ray ROBINSON v. Burl CAIN, Warden, et al.
    No. 2006-CI-3023.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Robinson, Arthur Ray, applying for Reconsideration this Court’s order dated October 5, 2007; Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th District Court Div. M, No. 522,447; to the First Circuit Court of Appeal, No. 2005-CA-2299.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    Domino JOHNSON v. LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS.
    No. 2007-CI-0232.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Johnson, Domino; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 526,-585; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No(s). 2006 CW 2242, 2006 CW 2214.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Frank WINDING v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0272.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Winding, Frank; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 289-937; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-1331.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Earl CRUM v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0274.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Crum, Earl; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. G, Nos. 1-95-742, 5-94-1922; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006-KW-2250.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Willie GORDON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0276.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Gordon, Willie; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. L, Nos. 2-89-387, 12-89-344; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2171.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Wade P. JACKSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-CI-0277.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Jackson, Wade P.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of West Feliciana, 20th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 18977; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CW 1565.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Gregory WILLIAMS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0279.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Williams, Gregory; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 7-00-284; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2170.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Richmond BROCK v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0313.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Brock, Richmond; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Union, 3rd Judicial District Court Div. B, Nos. 37,368, 37,369; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42004-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Robert ISADORE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0315.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Isadore, Robert; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Acadia, 15th Judicial District Court Div. A, Nos. 30,185, 30,184; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH07-93.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694; La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Ronnie YOUNG v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0316.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Young, Ronnie; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 111,198; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2369.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Anthony DARENSBOURG v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0317.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Darensbourg, Anthony; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 03-2973; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KA-572.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Billy Lynn HENDRICKS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0318.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Hendricks, Billy Lynn; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 218,866; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42,-185-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Eyba BROWN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0319.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Brown, Eyba; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 295,969; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2373.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Dennis Wayne BAKER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0320.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Baker, Dennis Wayne; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 278670; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KA06-1218.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Ivory DIXON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0322.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Dixon, Ivory; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. P, No. 90-1404; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 07-KH-27.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Loyal WHITE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0323.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re White, Loyal; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. A, No. 347-724; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-1580.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694; La.C.CrP. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Broderick BURGES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0324.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Burges, Broderick; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. H, Nos. 377152, 378095, 369928; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2196.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Elton Wayne MARTIN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KKH-0325.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Martin, Elton Wayne; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Winn, 8th Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. 40929; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42117-KH.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Lionel ROYAL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0326.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Royal, Lionel; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. D, Nos. 314276, 314277, 314278, 327570; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 05 KW 1819.

Denied. See State ex. rel. Fleury v. State, 93-2898 (La.10/13/95), 661 So.2d 488.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Emmitt JONES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0327.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Jones, Emmitt; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 79-234.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Paul Lane HARRIS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0328.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Harris, Paul Lane; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 52007; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 06-01371.

Denied. Relator is not entitled to free copies, but instead must seek a cost estimate from the records’ custodian. R.S. 44:31; State ex rel. Shelton v. State, 00-1901 (La.9/14/01), 796 So.2d 672; State ex rel. McKnight v. State, 98-2258 (La.App. 1st Cir.12/3/98), 742 So.2d 894.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Michael JOHNSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0330.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Johnson, Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 6-01-205; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2094.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Harold AUGUSTINE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0331.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Augustine, Harold; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. F, Nos. 214975, 214976; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2000.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Robert ISADORE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0433.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Isadore, Robert; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Acadia, 15th Judicial District Court Div. F, Nos. 32,696, 32,695; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH07-69.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694; La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. John KINSEL.
    No. 2007-KP-0490.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Kinsel, John; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. L, No. 96-7544; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KH-858.

Denied.

KNOLL, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Derrick GARRETT.
    No. 2007-K-0845.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Garrett, Derrick; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 393935; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1588.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jerry MOORE.
    No. 2007-K-0851.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Moore, Jerry; — -Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 355706-1; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1979.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Gerald DUGAS.
    No. 2007-K-0856.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Dugas, Gerald; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 381-449; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 06-KA-1338.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Donald Wayne HOLTON.
    No. 2007-K-0863.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Holton, Donald Wayne; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Ascension, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 17,863; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1468.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Kevin WALKER.
    No. 2007-K-0885.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Walker, Kevin; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Ascension, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 17,545; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1784.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michael A. SEYMOUR.
    No. 2007-K-0908.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Seymour, Michael; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 05-01-0005; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 0503.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Derek M. DOWDEN.
    No. 2007-K-0909.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Dowden, Derek M.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 240,562; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41,939-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. John H. JONES.
    No. 2007-K-0916.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Jones, John H.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of W. Baton Rouge, 18th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 052166A; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1543.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michael GILL.
    No. 2007-K-0917.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Gill, Michael; — Defendánt; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 05-04-0465; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1306.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Mickey Wayne JOHNSON.
    No. 2007-KO-0943.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Johnson, Mickey Wayne;' — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Acadia, 15th Judicial District Court Div. K, No. 65039; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1185.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Vincent T. ALLEN.
    No. 2007-KO-0944.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Allen, Vincent T.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. H, No. 449-097; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-KA-1434.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Robert Earl JONES.
    No. 2007-KO-0945.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Jones, Robert Earl;: — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 334151; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1686.

Denied.


text:
    John B. EDGAR, III, et al. v. Charles WERCHAN, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-1610.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Peavy, Sandra L.; Louisiana Landscape and Erosion Control Inc.; La-grone, Norma P.; Lagrone, Diane M.; La-grone, Johnny; Lagrone, James; — Defendants); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Iberville, 18th Judicial District Court Div. A, Nos. 30,914, 31,015, 54,072, 54,329; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 0611.

Denied.


text:
    AVOCA, INCORPORATED v. Ernest SINGLETON.
    No. 2007-C-1654.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Singleton, Ernest; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 105,195; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 CA 2651.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michael E. GORDON.
    No. 2007-KK-1687.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Allen, 33th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. CR04-4753; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No(s). 06-1140, 06-1128.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michael E. GORDON.
    No. 2007-KK-1688.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Gordon, Michael; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Allen, 38th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. CR04-4753; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No(s). 06-1140, 06-1128.

Denied.


text:
    Harry L. PHILLIPS, et al. v. James H. TRENT, III, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-1756.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re State of Louisiana; Department of Transportation & Development; — Defendants); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Bernard, 34th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 88-895; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-C-0835.

Denied.


text:
    R.T. TALLEY v. STATE of Louisiana, DOTD.
    No. 2007-CC-1757.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re State of Louisiana; Transportation and Dev. Dept, of; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 554579; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW1185.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michael WIGGINS.
    No. 2007-KK-1759.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Wiggins, Michael; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. B, No. 468-987; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-K-0858.

Denied.


text:
    Dr. Virendra CHARAN and Bindu Charan, Individually and on Behalf of Deependra Charan, and Anuradha Charan Saxena v. James L. BOWMAN, Paul Bowman, Allstate Insurance Company, Omni Insurance Company and State of Louisiana, Through the Department of Transportation and Development.
    No. 2007-C-1773.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Charan, Bindu; Charan, Virendra Dr. et al.; Saxena, Anuradha Charan; — ■ Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of Pointe Coupee, 18th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 31,898; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CA 0882.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., would grant.

KNOLL, J., would grant.


text:
    Mary Lu Doucet HARDEE v. CITY OF JENNINGS.
    No. 2007-C-1779.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Jennings, City of; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Worker’s Compensation District 03, No. 04-05403; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. WCA 07-242.

Denied.


text:
    MOUNT CALVARY BAPTIST CHURCH v. WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY OF PORT ALLEN, Louisiana.
    No. 2007-C-1780.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Williams Construction Company of Port Allen Louisiana; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of East Feliciana, 20th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 36,079; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CA 1674.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Duress WILSON.
    No. 2007-KK-1781.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Wilson, Duress; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ascension, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. A, Nos. 19851, 19852; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 KW 1302.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Lee Anthony QUIMBY.
    No. 2007-KK-1782.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Quimby, Lee Anthony; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Livingston, 21st Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 21711; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 KW 1415.

Denied.


text:
    Lashon HENRY v. FOREST ISLE APARTMENTS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP.
    No. 2007-C-1783.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Berk-Cohen Associates, L.L.C.;— Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Second City Court for the City of New Orleans, No. 03-424; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-CA-1457.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    Reverend Jerry JOHNSON, Sr. v. STATE of Louisiana and Kathleen B. Blanco, in her Official Capacity of Governor of the State of Louisiana, Charles Foti, in his Capacity as Attorney General and Al Alter, in his Official Capacity as Secretary of State.
    No. 2007-C-1784.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Johnson, Jei'ry Sr. Rev.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. J, No. 541,528; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CA 2024.

Denied.


text:
    Andree Ann PICOU v. STATE of Louisiana, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS, Office of State Police.
    No. 2007-CC-1786.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Louisiana, State of et ah; Public Safety and Corrections, Department of;— Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 524,883; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 0395.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    Tommy J. HOOKS, Jr., Paul F. Garwood and Noreen Wogan v. John KENNEDY, in his Capacity as Treasurer of the State of Louisiana and Administrator of Unclaimed Property Pursuant to La. R.S. and the State of Louisiana Through Richard P. Ieyoub, Attorney General of the State of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-C-1788.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Hooks, Tommy J. Jr., et al.; Garwood, Paul F.; Wogan, Noreen;— Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiora-ri and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 496,445; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No(s). 2006 CW 0100, 2006 CA 0541.

Denied.


text:
    QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSES, INC., Michael X. St. Martin and Virginia Rayne St. Martin v. I.P. PETROLEUM COMPANY, INC., International Paper Company, Montgomery, Barnett, Brown, Read, Hammond & Mintz, L.L.P. and John Y. Pearce.
    No. 2007-CC-1794.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Montgomery, Barnett, Brown, Read, Hammond & Mintz L.L.P.; Pearce, John Y.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 149973; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 1080.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., recused.


text:
    QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSES, INC., Michael X. St. Martin and Virginia Rayne St. Martin v. ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and Phillips Petroleum Co.
    No. 2007-CC-1795.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   ' In re I.P. Petroleum Co. Inc.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. D, Nos. 129412, 132981; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 1079.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., recused.


text:
    QUALITY ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSES, INC., Michael X. St. Martin and Virginia Rayne St. Martin v. I.P. PETROLEUM COMPANY, INC., International Paper Company, Montgomery, Barnett, Brown, Read, Hammond & Mintz, L.L.P. and John Y. Pearce.
    No. 2007-CC-1796.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re I.P. Petroleum Company, Inc.; International Paper Company; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 149973; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 1081.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., recused.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    Tony Len TAYLOR, on Behalf of the Minor, Madison Paige Childress TAYLOR v. Joe STOREY, John Ballance, Kevin Conley & Pafford Emergency Medical Services, Inc., et al.
    No. 2007-CC-1798.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Storey, Joe et al.; Conley, Kevin; Ballance, John; Pafford Emergency Medical Services Inc. et al.; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Bienville, 2nd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 36,554; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42788-CW.

Denied.

TRAYLOR, J., would grant.


text:
    Mary Lu Doucet HARDEE v. CITY OF JENNINGS.
    No. 2007-C-1799.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Hardee, Mary Lu Doucet; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review Office of Worker’s Compensation District 03, No. 04-05403; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. WCA 07-242.

Denied.


text:
    Daniel A. CRUMMEY v. Linda MORGAN, John R. Fulton a/k/a J.R. Fulton, J.R. Fulton (d/b/a) the Trading Post, d/b/a Watercraft Unlimited.
    No. 2007-CC-1806.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Fulton, J.R. d/b/a The Trading-Post; Watercraft Unlimited; Morgan, Linda; Fulton, John R. a/k/a Fulton, J. R.;— Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ascension, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 83579; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 0087.

Denied.


text:
    Helene Z. MORALES v. Dr. Patrick J. QUINLAN, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-1807.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Morales, Helene Z.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. B, No. 2006-7008; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-C-0594.

Denied.


text:
    Toni LEE v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO.
    No. 2007-CC-1814.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Lee, Toni; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, Baton Rouge City Court, No. 0511-09782; 19th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 546,985; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 0743.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    The TOWN OF HOMER, INC. d/b/a Homer Memorial Hospital v. GENERAL DESIGN, INC. and Storer HVAC Management Corporation.
    No. 2007-CC-1820.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re General Design, Inc. et al.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Claiborne, 2nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 36,669; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42,027-CW.

Denied.


text:
    Charles LAYSSARD v. STATE of La., DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS.
    No. 2007-C-1821.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Louisiana, State of et al.; Public Safety and Corrections; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Sabine, 11th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 55,111; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CA 07-78.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., to grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Ronaldo K. SMITH.
    No. 2007-KH-2083.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 2007.
   In re Smith, Ronaldo K.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 472139.

Denied.


text:
    David R.M. WILLIAMS v. Arthur MORRELL, in His Official Capacity as the Clerk of Criminal Court for the Parish of Orleans, Jay Dardenne, in His Official Capacity as the Secretary of State for the State of Louisiana, Sandra Wilson, Etc.
    No. 2007-C-2205.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 14, 2007.
    Prior report: — So.2d --•.
   In re Williams, David R. M.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of 1 Orleans, • Civil District Court Div. D, No. 2007-14198; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-CA-1447.

Not considered. Not timely filed.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


author: JOHNSON, J., TRAYLOR, J.,

text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Stephen SINGER.
    No. 2007-KD-2220.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 15, 2007.
   In re Singer, Stephen; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. D, No. 471-577; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-K-1485.

Stay denied. Writ denied. Relator has an adequate remedy on appeal.

JOHNSON, J.,

would stay the matter pending disposition of State v. Sims, 07-KK-2216 (La. 11/16/07), 968 So.2d 721, 2007 WL 4126895.

TRAYLOR, J.,

would stay the matter pending disposition of State v. Sims, 07-KK-2216 (La. 11/16/07), 968 So.2d 721, 2007 WL 4126895.


text:
    David R.M. WILLIAMS v. Arthur MORRELL, in his Official Capacity as the Clerk of Criminal Court for the Parish of Orleans, Jay Dardenne, in his Official Capacity as the Secretary of State for the State of Louisiana, Sandra Wilson, Etc.
    No. 2007-C-2205.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 15, 2007.
   In re Williams, David R. M..; Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s order dated November 14, 2007, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. D, No. 2007-14198; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-CA-1447.

Reconsideration denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., would grant reconsideration.

VICTORY, J., would grant reconsideration and would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Dejoshua L. WILLIAMS.
    No. 2007-K-0931.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re State of Louisiana; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 06-1898; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 06-KA-755.

Granted.


text:
    William GRAY, et ux v. AMERICAN NATIONAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY CO., et al.
    No. 2007-CC-1670.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Coregis Insurance Company; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Beauregard, 36th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. C-2004-302-A; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 07-00592.

Granted.


text:
    Peterson M. YOKUM and Polly Elizabeth Anderson v. 615 BOURBON STREET, L.L.C. d/b/a the Rock, Old Opera House, Inc. d/b/a Old Opera House and Willie Mintz.
    No. 2007-C-1785.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Yokum, Peterson M. et ah; Anderson, Polly Elizabeth; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. G, No. 2005-9748; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-CA-1057.

Granted.

TRAYLOR, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Daniel CAMPECHANO.
    No. 2007-K-1019.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Campechano, Daniel; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. K, No. 463-560; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-KA-1329.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


text:
    Chantel PROVOST v. BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, INC., et al.
    No. 2007-CC-1864.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Vermillion Hospital for Psychiatric and Addictive Medicine; Behavioral Health, Inc., et al. d/b/a; — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 2004-3040; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 07-00651.

“Not considered. Not timely filed. See Supreme Court Rule X, section 5.”


text:
    Claude PRINE, et al. v. Donovan W. BAILEY, M.D.
    No. 2007-CC-1876.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Bailey, Donovan W. M.D.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of East Carroll, 6th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 20,559; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42,282-CW.

“Not considered. Not timely filed. See Supreme Court Rule X, section 5.”


text:
    John D. DANIEL v. HOUSE OF RAEFORD FARMS OF LOUISIANA, L.L.C. and Eddie Lee Hill.
    No. 2007-CC-1884.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Daniel, John D.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Bienville, 2nd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 39-665; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42841-CW.

“Not considered. Not timely filed. See Supreme Court Rule X, section 5.”


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Barbara ANGELO.
    No. 2007-KK-1886.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Angelo, Barbara; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. E, No. 469-706; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-K-0814.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Robert GUIDRY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-3005.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Guidry, Robert;Defendant(s); Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s order dated September 28, 2007; Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 99-152-059; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2112.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Elliott L. HOGAN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0278.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Hogan, Elliott L.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Bossier, 26th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 113,245; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42002-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Tillman ALFRED v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0329.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Alfred, Tillman; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of West Feliciana, 20th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. W-06-9-349; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2258.

Denied. Untimely and repetitive. La. C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; cf. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).


text:
    STATE ex rel. Sammy Lee WILLIAMS, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0333.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Williams, Sammy Lee Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 68290; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 06-01043.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Melvin Dwayne PUGH Sr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0339.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Pugh, Melvin Dwayne Sr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Bossier, 26th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 116,907; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41516-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Samuel K. SMITH v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0346.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Smith, Samuel K.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 04-F1962; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42,-159-KH.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Cory WALL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0357.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Wall, Cory; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court Div. C, Nos. 80707, 81168, 81166; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2004 KW 0044.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Kyle M. ALEXANDER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0380.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Alexander, Kyle; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Assumption, 23rd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 97-37; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 1964.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Michael HAYWOOD v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0381.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Haywood, Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 447-062; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-1598.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Timothy MCCRACKEN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0386.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re McCracken, Timothy; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 01-4169; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 07-KH-38.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Darren KENT v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0390.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Kent, Darren; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 8-82-0551; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2344.

Denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Charles CHANEY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0391.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Chaney, Charles;- — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Tangipahoa, 21st Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 103318; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2128.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. David Lee LIGHTSEY, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0427.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Lightsey, David Lee Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court Div. F, Nos. OS-MO, 06-170870, 98-940; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit,' No. 2006 KW 1934.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. George Rodney MULLENIX v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0428.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Mullenix, George Rodney; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caldwell, 37th Judicial District Court Div. 0, No. 42,885; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41866-KH.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Shannon ALEXANDER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0429.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Alexander, Shannon; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 96-1508; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 07-KH-57.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694.


text:
    STATE ex rel. David ALLEN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0430.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Allen, David; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 394-080; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-1622.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Bernis T. BROWN v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0431.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Brown, Bernis T.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. M, No. 90-3893; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 04-KH-1430.

Denied. State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; cf. La.C.Cr.P art. 930.4(D); State v. McKinney, 406 So.2d 160, 161 (La.1981).


text:
    STATE ex rel. George ROLAND, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0432.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Roland, George Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Claiborne, 2nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 139,182; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 39,-365-KH.

Denied. Time-barred and repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; State v. Parker, 98-0256 (La.5/8/98), 711 So.2d 694; cf. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).


text:
    STATE ex rel. Howard JACKSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0435.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Jackson, Howard; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. N, No. 94-6661; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 07-KH-45.

Denied. Repetitive. Cf. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(D).


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Calvin COLEMAN.
    No. 2007-KP-0514.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Coleman, Calvin; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, No. 416-083; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-1595.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Vincent Ray VERRET.
    No. 2007-K-0830.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Verret, Vincent Ray; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Terrebonne, 32nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 410,993; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1337.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Taurius Marques HOLMES.
    No. 2007-KO-0947.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Holmes, Taurius Marques; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Washington, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 05-CR3-92375; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1433.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Darryl A. HOLMES.
    No. 2007-KO-0949.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Holmes, Darryl A.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Avoyelles, 12th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 130157; to the Court of Appeal,' Third Circuit, No. 06-1173.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Rayna WYNNE.
    No. 2007-K-0966.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Wynne, Rayna; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Webster, 26th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 69,776; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41,-760-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. George Commeta JACOBS.
    No. 2007-KO-1010.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Jacobs, George Commeta; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 273,440; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KA 06-1453.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Charles REYNOLDS.
    No. 2007-KO-1023.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Reynolds, Charles; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Desoto, 11th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 0512148; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41,-612-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michael Kevin HAILEY.
    No. 2007-KO-1024.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Hailey, Michael Kevin; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 234,728; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 41,897-KA.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jimmie HARRISON.
    No. 2007-KO-1025.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Harrison, Jimmie; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 378604; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 1823.

Denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Roderick D. JACKSON.
    No. 2007-KO-1026.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Jackson, Roderick D.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 398744; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2005 KA 1904.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Kenneth TITTLE.
    No. 2007-KO-1045.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Tittle, Kenneth; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 12930-03; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1430.

Denied.


text:
    Joseph GREFER, Camille Grefer, Rose Marie Grefer Hassi and Henry Grefer v. ALPHA TECHNICAL, et al.
    No. 2007-C-1800.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Exxon Mobil Corporation; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. A, No. 97-15004; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-CA-1237.

Denied.

KIMBALL, J., would grant.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    G & H SEED COMPANY, INC. v. HUMBLE WATER CORPORATION, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-1837.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Humble Water Corporation et al.; Humble, Mildred R.; Humble, Jerrily B.; Humble, John Sr.; Humble, John Jr.;— Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Acadia, 15th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 81388; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 07-00900.

Denied.


text:
    Elmo and Geraldine WELLS v. LOUISIANA CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORP.
    No. 2007-CC-1838.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corp.; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. J, No. 2006-6067; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-C-0897.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    Jerry BICKHAM, et al. v. INPHYNET, INC., et al.
    No. 2007-CC-1863.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Bickham, Jerry et al.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Civil District Court Div. F, No. 2004-374; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-C-0356.

Denied.


text:
    Mark WILLOW v. DEPARTMENT OF POLICE.
    No. 2007-C-1871.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Willow, Mark; — Plaintiff; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review City Civil Service Commission Orleans, No. 7286; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-CA — 167.

Denied.


text:
    Marie BENNIEFIEL v. ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 2007-CC-1874.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Zurich American Insurance Company et al.; Stine Inc.;' — Defendant(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 2003-003176; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CW 07-00771.

Denied.

VICTORY, J., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Brandi EISWORTH.
    No. 2007-KK-1885.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Eisworth, Brandi; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. F1595771; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 07-K-590.

Denied.


text:
    SOUTHEAST WIRELESS NETWORK, INC., Slaydon Investment, Inc., and Celia Katz, Individually and in Her Capacity as Independent Executrix for the Succession of Samuel B. Katz v. U.S. TELEMETRY CORPORATION, U.S. Telemetry Network, Inc., K. Steven Roberts, Thomas L. Siebert, Donald M. Clarke, S. Andrew Banks, Charles M. Bruce and James K. Gable.
    No. 2007-C-1892.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Southeast Wireless Network Inc., et al.; Slaydon Investment Inc.; Katz, Celia; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 505,430; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CA 1920.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jonathan BOYER.
    No. 2007-KK-1896.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Boyer, Jonathan; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 14005-02; to the.Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KW 07-00085.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jennifer COX.
    No. 2007-KK-1898.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Cox, Jennifer; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Bossier, 26th Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 147,422; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42,-232-KW.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Christopher CALENDER.
    No. 2007-KK-2222.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Calender, Christopher; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. K, No. 432,327; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-K-1450.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Ronald BROOKS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0382.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 2007.
   In re Brooks, Ronald; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. I, No. 390-582; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-1551.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Frank LARRE’.
    No. 2007-KK-2233.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 19, 2007.
   In re Larre’, Frank; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 371031; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 KW 1576.

Not considered; not timely filed.

WEIMER, J., would consider the merits.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Ellery C. JONES.
    No. 2007-K-1052.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Jones, Ellery C.; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Plaquemines, 25th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 05-0431; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-KA-0485.

Granted.


text:
    The NEWMAN MARCHIVE PARTNERSHIP, INC. v. CITY OF SHREVEPORT.
    No. 2007-C-1890.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Shreveport City of;- — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 464,545-C; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 42,073-CA.

Granted.


text:
    KINGS PLACE APARTMENTS, Thibodaux Housing 1994 Partners ALPIC, and Apartments Investment and Management Company d/b/a AIMCO v. FORET LAND AND TREE COMPANY, LLC and St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company.
    No. 2007-CC-1958.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Thibodaux Housing 1994 Partners ALPIC; AIMCO; Kings Place Apartments; Apartments Investment Management Company d/b/a; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 105024-E; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2007 CW 1114.

Granted. Remanded to Court Of Appeal, 1st Circuit, for briefing, argument and opinion.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Terrence LEE.
    No. 2007-KH-0456.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Lee, Terrence; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Caddo, 1st Judicial District Court Div. B, Nos. 000 235 894, 000 238 950.

Granted for the sole purpose of transferring the filing to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, for its consideration.


text:
    In re Michael J. RILEY.
    No. 2007-OB-1615.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Disciplinary Board; — Other; Applying for Petition For Readmission Office of the Disciplinary Board, Nos. 05-DB-062, 06-DB-041.

Readmission denied.

JOHNSON, J., would grant readmission with conditions.


text:
    In re Edwin E. BURKS.
    No. 2007-B-0637.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Burks, Edwin E.; — Plaintiff; (s); Applying for Rehearing of this Court’s action dated August 31, 2007 on Findings and Recommendations (Formal Charges) Office of Disciplinary Counsel, Nos. 99-DB-128; 05-DB-050.

Not considered; not timely filed. Judgment is definitive. See La.Code Civ. P. Art. 2167; Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 26(E).


text:
    In re Glenda Ann SPEARS.
    No. 2007-B-0499.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Spears, Glenda Ann; — Applying for Rehearing of this Court’s order dated August 31, 2007, Office of the Disciplinary Board No. 05-DB-024.

Rehearing denied.

CALOGERO, C.J. and JOHNSON, J., to grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jack S. SPEARS.
    No. 2006-K-2704.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Spears, Jack S.; — Defendant; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s Action dated August 31, 2007; Parish of Lincoln, 3rd Judicial District Court, Div. A, No. 46498; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 39,302-KA.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Joseph BROOKS v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-2929.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Joseph Brooks, applying for Reconsideration of this court’s action dated September 28, 2007, from the 19th Judicial District Court No. 2-97-0389; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 1805.

Reconsideration denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Wade C. GRIFFIN.
    No. 2007-KO-0002.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   . In Re Griffin, Wade C.; — Defendant; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated September 14, 2007; Parish of Avoyelles, 12th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 128628A; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06 00543-KA.

Reconsideration denied.

KNOLL, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Gary SMITH.
    No. 2007-K-211.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Smith, Gary; — Defendant; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated September 28, 2007; Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 406581; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KA 0820.

Reconsideration denied.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    BASS, LTD. v. Tim GERALD, et al.
    No. 2007-C-1225.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Triangle Venture Associates, Inc.; — Defendant; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s action dated September 21, 2007; Parish of St. Landry, 27th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 04-C-2115; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. 06-1125.

Reconsideration denied.

WEIMER, J., would grant.


text:
    Joseph TRUJILLO and Patricia Trujillo v. Robert DUHE and Sym Realty.
    No. 2007-C-1920.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Trujillo, Joseph; Trujillo, Patricia; — Plaintiff(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 501,264; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 CA 2030.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


text:
    In re Ahmad MUHAMMAD.
    No. 2007-OB-2124.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Muhammad, Ahmad; — Plaintiff; Applying for Motion to Set Aside Finding and Hearing Committee Office of the Disciplinary Board, No. 05-DB-056.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Victor VERDUN, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2006-KH-2939.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Verdun, Victor Jr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 313477; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 1767.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Charles M. LEE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0271.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Lee, Charles M.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of E. Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. G, No. 06-02-672; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 0846.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Rodney C. HULSEY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0335.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Hulsey, Rodney C.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Bernard, 34th Judicial District Court Div. A, No. 274-131; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-1568.

Denied.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Frank WALGAMOTTE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0337.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Walgamotte, Frank; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. John, 40th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 29,285.

Denied. Moot. The district court has acted.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Carl JOHNSON, Sr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0383.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Johnson, Carl, Sr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 278527; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2478.

Denied. Premature.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. Michael MEAD v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0384.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Mead, Michael; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. G, No. 406-128; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2006-K-1624.

Denied. Repetitive. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4(A).


text:
    STATE ex rel. Carl JOHNSON, Sr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0434.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Johnson, Carl Sr.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. C, No. 278527; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2006 KW 2530.

Denied. Premature.

WEIMER, J., recused.


text:
    STATE ex rel. C. Troy JONES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 2007-KH-0436.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 21, 2007.
   In re Jones, Troy C.; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. J, Nos. 354-639, 354-238; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2007-K-0109.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.