author: JIM GARRISON, Justice Ad Hoc.

text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Edward Lee GIOVANNI, Jr.
    No. 81-KA-1218.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Jan. 25, 1982.
    Rehearing Denied Feb. 19, 1982.

      William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Leonard K. Knapp, Dist. Atty., Charles W. Richard, Abbott J. Reeves, Asst. Dist. Attys., for plaintiff-appellee.
    D. Michael Mooney, and Carl A. Leck-band, Jr., Lake Charles, for defendant-appellant.

       Lemmon, J., concurred in the denial of rehearing.

   JIM GARRISON, Justice Ad Hoc.

Edward Lee Giovanni, Jr., the defendant, was charged with three counts of first degree murder for the killing of Paul Terry Prejean, Margaret Ellen Prejean and Jessie Paul Prejean on or about September 2, 1978, in violation of La.R.S. 14:30. A true bill was returned by the Calcasieu Grand Jury against the defendant on October 5, 1978. On November 4,1980, the jury found the defendant guilty as charged on all three counts and on November 5, 1980, the jury recommended that the defendant be sentenced to life imprisonment. After denying the defendant’s motion for a new trial, the trial judge sentenced the defendant to three terms of life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence. The terms of imprisonment on counts one and two were directed to run concurrently and the term on count three to run consecutively with regard to counts one and two. The defendant has appealed his conviction and has argued each of nine assignments of error.

On September 2, 1978, at some time between midnight and 2:20 a. m., the Prejean family was murdéred in their home located in Carlyss, Louisiana. Paul Terry Prejean and his wife, Margaret Ellen Prejean, were definitely shot in the head and their infant son, Jessie Paul Prejean, may also have been shot, although that has not been clearly established. In any case, their house was then set ablaze, having the effect of carbonizing the three bodies inside. A light-colored small-sized car, fitting the description of the defendant’s light blue Javelin, was seen leaving the Prejean premises even while it was still ablaze. A man fitting the defendant’s description was seen shortly af-terwards at a well-lighted car wash in town, washing out the inside of a light blue, small-sized car.

The fire at the Prejean residence was reported at approximately 2:20 a. m. and was extinguished after 3:00 a. m. When the fire department arrived they noticed that Terry Prejean’s dump truck was on top of an old pickup truck, apparently having been backed across the pickup truck. The headlights of the dump truck were still on and the driver’s side was open. There were deep tire tracks, 30 to 40 feet in length, on the wet grass on this side of the house. Pieces of rope were also found in this vicinity. It appeared that the dump truck was used to pull out a small-sized car which became stuck in the wet grass on the side of the house.

Fire and police investigators worked throughout the day collecting and developing evidence from the scene of the fire. The defendant was questioned about the fire by officers Ogea and Hoffpauir of the Calcasieu Parish sheriff’s office on the day of the homicides. The defendant informed Ogea that he had been staying with the Prejeans. However, the defendant claimed to know nothing about the fire and stated that he did not return to the Prejeans’ after he and the Prejeans left the Grangers’ that evening around midnight. In response to Ogea’s comment that Terry’s dump truck was not where it was supposed to be, the defendant stated that earlier that afternoon he had helped Terry move a white Dodge Colt automobile which Terry had just sold, but that Terry was “real high” (meaning on drugs) and consequently left the dump truck parked on top of a pickup truck.

The murders appear to be drug related. Terry and Margaret Ellen Prejean apparently sold marijuana in fairly large quantities. The defendant was an acquaintance of the Prejeans’ for quite some time and appears to have been associated with them in their marijuana dealings. However, there is no direct evidence that the Prejeans bought their marijuana directly through the defendant.

A reconstruction of the events beginning Friday evening, September 1, 1978, reveals the following: The defendant was staying with the Prejean family that evening. Kenneth and Cindy Godeaux brought their little girl with them to visit the Prejeans somewhere between 6:30 and 7:00 p.m. Neither remember seeing a white Dodge Colt which Terry Prejean owned and both remember seeing Terry’s dump truck parked in front of the house, as usual. The defendant had taken some “Demerol” that evening and had sold Kenneth Godeaux a tablet of Demerol. Apparently nearly everyone smoked marijuana that night.

Terry Prejean appears to have been apprehensive that evening for a number of reasons. Terry was concerned why the defendant was at his house two weekends in a row because the defendant, Giovanni, usually came up from Houston only every other weekend. Terry’s concern was heightened because he knew the defendant had recenta ly stolen 150 pounds of marijuana from the same source in Houston who supplied the Prejeans with their marijuana. This same supplier was expected at the Prejeans that weekend to collect $10,000.00 from Terry for the marijuana which had been advanced to him a week earlier. The Prejeans counted the money from that week’s sales and came up with $2,660.00, which Terry placed in his front pocket. The Prejeans were, therefore, short more than $7,000.00.

At approximately 8:00 p. m., Kenneth and Cindy Godeaux left the Prejean premises while the Prejeans and the defendant went to visit James Scott Granger at his girlfriend’s house. They remained there for three or four hours drinking beer, eating pizza and smoking marijuana. At approximately 11:00 p. m. the Prejeans left the home and the defendant left shortly thereafter. Just before the defendant left he complained to James Granger that he thought Terry Prejean had stolen some marijuana from him and he asked Granger if he knew where he, the defendant, could buy a gun.

When the defendant was arrested he was initially placed in the same cell with an old friend from the street, Joseph Maney Gas-pard, Jr. Gaspard testified that while they were incarcerated together the defendant confided that he indeed had committed these murders. The defendant allegedly, according to Gaspard, related the following details of the murders: The defendant was acting as the collection agent on a drug deal; he used both a shotgun and a .22 calibre revolver to kill the victims; he burned down the house with gasoline; he threw one of the guns in the river; and he mentioned something about a pickup truck. It is to be noted that Gaspard’s testimony was contrary to his earlier testimony that the defendant related nothing about the murders to him. Gaspard subsequently claimed that he changed his earlier testimony because the district attorney transferred him from Angola to the Calcasieu Parish Rehabilitation Center for his own protection and promised not to object to his early parole.

In addition, at trial, Cindy Godeaux identified large bags of marijuana'and a Mary Gin as resembling items which she had seen at the Prejeans’ that evening and the previous night. These items were recovered from an old, abandoned refrigerator on property adjacent to the residence of the defendant’s father on September 12, 1978, pursuant to a search warrant. A fingerprint from Margaret Ellen Prejean and one from the defendant were lifted from the items recovered from the refrigerator.

Some confusion as to the identity of the corpse thought to be that of Terry Paul Prejean was evident. Tests of fluids from his body revealed blood type AB where both of his parents had blood type 0, arguably a scientific inconsistency. However, an oral surgeon positively identified X-rays of the victim’s teeth as matching those of Terry Paul Prejean.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR WITH REGARD TO THE RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL

The Calcasieu grand jury indicted the defendant for murder on October 5, 1978. The defendant was found guilty at trial on November 4, 1980. Consequently, one of the most important of the defendant’s assignments of errors would be that made with regard to his right to a speedy trial.

The defendant was initially arraigned on October 16, 1978, at which time the court allowed the defendant’s attorney to withdraw, and appointed D. Michael Mooney as defense counsel, refixing arraignment for October 23, 1978. On October 23, 1978, defendant pleaded not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity and moved that a sanity commission be granted. The court granted defendant’s counsel’s motion, deferring fixing a trial date, and set November 15,1978, for defendant’s sanity hearing. At this time, defense counsel requested additional time to file motions. On October 24, 1978, the court granted the state’s motion to refix the sanity hearing for November 22, 1978.

On October 31,1978, the trial court entertained defendant’s discovery motion, a motion for a bill of particulars and motion to quash the indictment. On November 22, 1978, the sanity hearing was conducted and defendant was found mentally competent to stand trial. On January 9, 10 and 11, 1979, the defendant’s motion to suppress was tried. The trial court denied defendant’s motion and defendant’s counsel thereupon applied to this court for writs, which were granted.

On October 8, 1979, this court issued its opinion reversing the trial court’s denial of the motion to suppress and remanded the case for further proceedings. 375 So.2d 1360. On December 14, 1979, the trial court heard and granted, in part, defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence and motion to suppress inculpatory statements. Defense counsel therein indicated his intention to again- apply to this court for writs, contesting the trial court’s determination not to suppress items of evidence found adjacent to but not located on defendant’s property. (However, the record does not reflect that defendant applied for these writs.)

On March 19, 1980, the defense counsel filed a motion for a preliminary examination, a petition for a change of venue, and a motion for a speedy trial. On March 26, 1980, the trial court heard and denied defendant’s motion for preliminary examination and took under advisement defendant’s petition for a change of venue. The minutes do not reflect any ruling on defendant’s motion for a speedy trial. However, on April 7, 1980, the district attorney indicated that the trial was set for that day. This would seem to support the defendant’s position that the trial court granted defendant’s motion for a speedy trial and ordered the trial set for April 7, 1980. It was on April 7,1980, that the district attorney nolle prosequied the defendant’s indictment because of what he claimed was an apparently fatal weakness in the state’s case concerning newly discovered evidence with regard to a discrepancy in the victim’s blood type.

The defendant was then reindicted on May 9,1980, and arraigned on May 12,1980. The trial court set May 20, 1980 for a hearing on the motions for discovery but subsequently granted the state a three-day continuance until May 23, 1980, to answer the motion, deferring the fixing of the trial date. On June 30, 1980, the trial date on this matter was fixed for October 20, 1980. On October 14, 1980, the court denied defendant’s motion for a change of venue and on motion of the state refixed the trial date for October 27, 1980. The trial actually began on October 27, 1980.

In summary, there were a number of reasons for the delay: Defense counsel’s request for the appointment of the sanity commission, his filing of the motion to quash and his applying to this court for writs would seem to account for at least twelve months of the 25-month delay between the first indictment and the trial in the present case. None of the delays attributable to the state were extraordinary or capricious. None of them appeared to be deliberate on the part of the district attorney nor designed to hamper the defense. None appeared to be due to the negligence on the part of the court or the prosecution or others charged with responsibility of providing a speedy trial. All of the delays appeared to be legitimate and recognized grounds for the continuances granted. Consequently, this assignment of error appears to be without merit.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR WITH REGARD TO TRIAL COURT’S REFUSAL TO SUPPRESS STATEMENTS MADE BY JOSEPH MANEY GAS-PARD

Here, defense counsel argues that the trial court erred in refusing to grant defendant’s motion to suppress the statements made to the defendant by Gaspard. Defense counsel contends that these statements should have been suppressed in the second indictment under the doctrine of collateral estoppel, since the trial court ruled that they be suppressed under the first indictment. The trial court indicated that he refused to allow the suppression of these statements carried over under the new indictment because there had never been a hearing on the merits of the motion to suppress. The judge also indicated that the defendant never did thereafter move to suppress statements made by Gaspard, as he might have done.

Indeed, it does not appear that the merits of this motion to suppress ever reached the point of a hearing. The defense counsel did attempt to take writs to this court relative to the denial of the motion to suppress the statements of Gaspard, during the course of the first indictment, but this writ application was denied. With regard to the second indictment it does not appear that the defense counsel ever attempted to argue the merits of this motion. Rather, the defense counsel, during the pre-trial proceedings of the second indictment, at trial and on appeal, appears to rely on the doctrine of collateral estoppel to carry over the suppression of the Gaspard statements to the second indictment.

It does appear, on the merits, that these alleged oral inculpatory statements were properly admissible. Although defendant allegedly made these statements after he was illegally arrested, the statements were made to a fellow inmate as well as to law enforcement authorities. The inmate was not planted in the jail by authorities and it does not appear that the defendant made these statements under the influence of fear or duress. On the contrary, the defendant appears to have been confiding in an old friend from the street. It appears that the only reason these statements were originally suppressed was because Gaspard initially refused to testify in this matter. These statements do, indeed, appear to be voluntary and spontaneous admissions to a co-inmate and acquaintance and therefore sufficiently attenuated from the initial arrest to be admissible. See Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963); Dunaway v. New York, 442 U.S. 200, 99 S.Ct. 2248, 60 L.Ed.2d 824 (1979); and Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590, 95 S.Ct. 2254, 45 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975).

This assignment is without merit.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR WITH REGARD TO THE TRIAL COURT’S REFUSAL TO SUPPRESS PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

Here, defense counsel argues that the affidavit in support of the search warrant is insufficient because it is based on statements made by the defendant during the course of an illegal arrest and detention. The defense counsel contends that the state impermissibly sought to establish probable cause to illegally obtain evidence. The subsequent search is therefore claimed to be warrantless and unreasonable.

The state, on the other hand, argues that the magistrate did have sufficient probable cause to issue the warrant, apart from any illegally obtained confession which might have come from the defendant, and contends that the defense counsel failed to fulfill his burden of proving otherwise because the affidavit for the warrant is not included in this record. The state next distinguishes the grounds for suppressing the defendant’s confession (lack of probable cause to support the defendant’s arrest) from a valid basis upon which to issue a search warrant. The state, therefore, submits that the search warrant is not rendered invalid merely because of the lack of probable cause to make an arrest of the defendant.

Trial Judge Henry L. Yelverton indicated, in his per curiam, that the defendant requests only that the favorable portion of Judge Planchard’s previous ruling on the motion to suppress in the first indictment be recognized in the second indictment. Judge Yelverton, therefore, reasoned that the issue was not raised in the second indictment since the motion to suppress evidence not suppressed in the first indictment was never renewed in the second indictment.

A review of the record indicates that Judge Yelverton was correct in ruling that the defendant never raised this issue under the second indictment. Under the first indictment, on December 14, 1978, Judge Planchard, for oral reasons assigned and not in this record, made the following ruling on the defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence. All items found on the property at 1224 Giovanni should be suppressed, but all items seized and found on the property adjacent thereto and in the wooded area in the refrigerator could be used as evidence in this case. Defense counsel thereupon indicated his intention to apply to this court for writs. However, on July 31, 1980, after the district attorney nolle prosequied the first indictment and the defendant was reindicted, it appears that the defense counsel moved only to suppress all evidence that was suppressed under the first indictment.

On August 8, 1980, Judge Planchard ruled that all matters heard by this court would stand, but denied the defendant’s motion to suppress. Defense counsel objected to Judge Yelverton’s ruling and applied to this court for writs. However, this court denied the writ application. Regardless, the defense counsel never appeared to re-urge his argument that items seized from property adjacent to the property located at 1224 Giovanni Street should also be suppressed.

The present prosecution is based upon the Bill of Information filed on May 8, 1980. No motion to suppress evidence seized from property adjacent to 1224 Giovanni was ever filed under the second indictment.

Even so, the merits here do not appear to aid the defense. A transcript of the hearing on the original motion to suppress, December 14, 1980, does not appear in the present record. An examination of the warrant application executed on September 12, 1978, indicates that the affidavit was based almost entirely upon statements taken from the defendant on September 10 that this court then ordered suppressed. The ruling of Judge Planchard suppressing all items taken from the house therefore appears wholly correct.

However, the remaining items not suppressed were the two bags of marijuana seized from an “abandoned” refrigerator and later found to bear the finger prints of Margaret Ellen Prejean and defendant. According to the trial testimony of Officer Tom Harless, the refrigerator was located “approximately ... oh, three yards from what I considered the property line of the Giovanni residence, to the west of the Giovanni residence.” The refrigerator was discovered at the foot of a tree by Elbert Welborn, employed at the time as a supervisor for the State Fire Marshall’s Office. Welborn described the area as “... a wooded lot that’s grown up in trees and bushes . .. . ” The refrigerator was tipped on its side, Welborn testified, and the front door was missing. Easily viewed inside were the two white garbage bags which were found to contain marijuana and later yielded the incriminating sets of fingerprints.

On this record, it seems certain that defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the refrigerator, as it lay outside the boundary of his property and was otherwise open to the view of anyone who passed by. Although the officers may have been technically trespassing on defendant’s property because the warrant they carried was invalid, their seizure of the marijuana bags thus violated no interest of defendant under the Fourth Amendment, or La.Const. 1974, Art. 1, § 5. See State v. Dupuis, 378 So.2d 934 (La.1979). In denying the motion to suppress in this regard, Judge Planchard thus specifically noted that “(t)here was no evidence to show the Court that there was any control over . . . this piece of property by the Giovannis, so there was no right of privacy which could be invaded . . . the court is not going into the open field doctrine, nor the abandonment doctrine completely, but I feel that probably either one can be analogous to this situation.”

This assignment of error lacks merit.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR WITH REGARD TO THE TRIAL COURT’S ALLOWING JIMMY GODEAUX TO TESTIFY BECAUSE THE DEFENSE WAS NOT NOTIFIED IN ADVANCE BY THE STATE PURSUANT TO DISCOVERY

The defense counsel contends that at least three weeks prior to trial the state and Godeaux reached an agreement by which the state would drop pending distribution charges against Godeaux in exchange for his testimony in the present case, yet defense counsel, he further contends, was notified of this only immediately before Go-deaux took the stand.

The trial court’s per curiam indicates that defense counsel was notified that Godeaux would testify one week prior to trial and that Godeaux was not offered immunity from prosecution on the outstanding charge until the night before he was called to the stand. Inasmuch as the state supplied this information to defense counsel on the following morning, the trial judge complied with its discovery obligation insofar as the offer and arrangements with this witness were made known as soon as they materialized.

During the course of the trial, on the morning of November 3, 1980, the state filed a “Notice of Intent of Exculpatory Evidence in Possession of District Attorney,” relative to an offer to dismiss pending charges against Jimmy Godeaux if he would cooperate and testify truthfully in the present case. This notice was filed immediately before Godeaux was called to the stand to testify and defense counsel objected thereto on the grounds that the state had failed to timely notify him of this exculpatory evidence. The prosecutor thereupon informed the court that the offer to dismiss the pending charges against Go-deaux was communicated to him only the prior evening; that Godeaux was then in Corpus Christi, Texas, with an outstanding arrest warrant against him; and that Go-deaux’s wife was informed that this offer would only stand if Godeaux immediately returned to testify in the present case. Based upon these representations, the trial court allowed Godeaux to testify over defense counsel’s objections.

On redirect examination Godeaux testified that he never actually received a subpoena to testify in this trial and was not sure that the state was ever going to use him. Defense counsel thereupon motioned for a mistrial and that the charges be dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct on the basis that the state “cut the deal with Go-deaux three weeks ago.” The state responded that it was not until the previous night that it decided to call Godeaux to testify. Since the offer to dismiss the pending charges against Godeaux was contingent upon his truthful testimony and the state was uncertain as to whether Godeaux would ever testify, this alleged exculpatory evidence might never become relevant.

It is uncontested that the state gave defense counsel Godeaux’s name as a possible witness a week prior to trial. Any.bias or prejudice with regard to the state’s offer of immunity could only become relevant for impeachment purposes if the subject testified, a matter not clearly known to the prosecution until the day before his testimony. Moreover, the defense counsel, through his cross examination, clearly made the jury aware of the possible bias of this witness. The impeaching material was therefore effectively presented to the jury and counsel has not demonstrated how the last minute disclosure of the immunity grant to the witness hampered the cross examination of Godeaux with regard to his interest in the case.

This assignment of error lacks merit.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR WITH REGARD TO THE TRIAL COURT’S REFUSAL TO GRANT A MISTRIAL BASED ON REFERENCE IN TESTIMONY TO THE SHOTGUN RECOVERED FROM THE GIOVANNI RESIDENCE

The defense counsel contends that it was insufficient for the trial court to merely sustain his objection to this portion of Deputy Harless’s testimony because it would be virtually impossible for the jurors to ignore such a reference to a .12 gauge shotgun, given the fact that there was medical testimony that the victims were shot with such a shotgun and that defense counsel in his opening statement emphasized that a murder weapon was never recovered.

The state submits that the reference to the shotgun was of little moment because no evidence was ever offered that the shotgun was the murder weapon and no shotgun was ever introduced into evidence. Therefore, it reasons that the defense counsel’s choice for urging any error through his cross examination instead of an admonition from the judge was sufficient under the circumstances.

The trial judge, in his per curiam, reasoned that the reference to the .12 gauge shotgun was inadvertent and the fact that this weapon had been suppressed in an earlier proceeding was unknown to this witness. He noted that defense counsel’s cross examination established that this was not the murder weapon and that defense counsel requested this procedure in lieu of admonition. It is apparent that, in the total context of the circumstances, no prejudice was suffered by the defendant here.

This assignment of error lacks merit.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR WITH REGARD TO THE TRIAL COURT’S DENIAL OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A CHANGE OF VENUE DUE TO PREJUDICIAL PRE-TRIAL PUBLICITY

In this regard the defense counsel contends that the said pre-trial publicity combined to make an environment in which it was impossible for the defendant to receive a fair trial. Specific incidents of the alleged pre-trial publicity included: The controversy surrounding the defendant’s initial arrest; the suppression of certain statements made by him; the suppression of evidence found in his home; the medical bills which he ran up and which were charged to the parish; the subsequent dismissal of the charges against him; and his later re-indictment on the same charges. The state has responded that the defendant has failed to establish such prejudice as would deny him a fair and impartial trial.

The defendant’s motion for a change of venue was tried and submitted on October 10, 1980. On October 14, 1980, after hearing the testimony of witnesses and arguments of counsel and reviewing the exhibits offered into evidence, Judge Patin denied the defendant’s motion.

As Judge Patin pointed out, this case was an unusually newsworthy one due to the nature of the offense charged and the sequence of events which followed the initial charges. However, while there were numerous articles and television pictorial and news reports, the court found from the evidence submitted that none were inflammatory in nature and that there did not exist such prejudice, undue influence or other reasons which would affect the answers of jurors on the voir dire examination, or the testimony of witnesses at the trial

Grounds for a motion to change venue are provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 622. Under this article the defendant must prove more than mere knowledge of public facts surrounding the offense to be entitled to have his trial moved to another parish. The burden of proof is on the defendant to show that there exists such prejudice in the collective mind of the community that a fair trial is impossible. State v. Adams, 394 So.2d 1204 (La.1981); State v. Felde, 382 So.2d 1384 (La.1980); State v. Sonnier, 379 So.2d 1336 (La.1979), on rehearing, 379 So.2d 1368 (La.1980); State v. Matthews, 354 So.2d 552 (La.1978); State v. Sheppard, 350 So.2d 615 (La.1977). It is well established that whether the defendant has made the requisite showing is a question addressed to the trial court’s sound discretion.

The subject articles complained of here, which were produced from the media, were mainly factual accounts rather than prejudicial. The trial court’s ruling denying a change of venue, accordingly, was proper and well within its discretion.

This assignment of error lacks merit.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR WITH REGARD TO THE TRIAL COURT’S HAVING ALLOWED THE PROSECUTOR TO MENTION ALLEGEDLY AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES IN HIS OPENING STATEMENTS WHICH ALLEGEDLY WERE NOT PROVED AND WHICH WERE NOT GIVEN TO DEFENSE COUNSEL PRIOR TO TRIAL AND THE STATE’S NOTICE OF INTENT

The state’s response to this contention is that the defendant waived any error which might have occurred because no contemporaneous objection was made to the opening statement. The trial judge, in his per curiam, suggests that the district attorney’s opening statement contained a correct and permissible recitation of the applicable law and cautioned the jury that the only evidence to be considered was that given by witnesses and apparent from exhibits.

A review of the record reveals that the trial judge was correct and well within his discretion. The prosecutor does not appear to have acted in bad faith with regard to any of his remarks. Nor does it appear that the defendant was in any way whatsoever prejudiced by them.

This assignment of error is without merit.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR WITH REFUSAL ON THE PART OF THE TRIAL COURT TO GRANT A MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL

The defense counsel bases this assignment essentially on the text of his motion for a new trial, the other assignments of error argued herein and the totality of circumstances surrounding this particular case which allegedly created a hostile and prosecution prone atmosphere. The state submits that no new issues were raised regarding the said motion for a new trial and that a new trial would not produce a different result than the verdict reached.

The trial judge, in his per curiam, indicated that he denied the motion because it did not present any circumstances or arguments that had not been previously submitted during the trial of the case.

To the same extent, this assignment of error does not present any circumstances or arguments not previously submitted. The trial judge was clearly correct and well within his discretion in refusing to grant a motion for a new trial.

This assignment of error is without merit.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR TO THE EFFECT THAT THE VERDICT WAS CONTRARY TO THE LAW AND THE EVIDENCE

This is an extremely general assignment of error which is simply not supported by a review of the evidence and the applicable law. The jury had sufficient basis upon which to arrive at its verdict beyond a reasonable doubt. A rational trier of fact in this case could well have concluded that the defendant murdered the three victims.

This assignment of error is without merit.

s(s if: sfc # sft

For the foregoing reasons, the convictions and the sentences in this case are affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

CALOGERO and MARCUS, JJ., concur.

       Judges James C. Gulotta and Jim Garrison of the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, and Bernard J. Bagert of the Criminal District Court, Parish of Orleans, participated in this decision as Associate Justices ad hoc, joined by Chief Justice John A. Dixon, Jr. and Associate Justices Pascal F. Calogero, Jr., Walter F. Marcus, Jr. and Fred A. Blanche, Jr.

      . A Mary Gin is apparently some mechanical device which separates the stems and seeds in marijuana from the leaves.


source: Caselaw Access Project

author: HALL, Justice Ad Hoc.

license: Public Domain

text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Berlon Karl CRAIN and Darrell Spurlock.
    No. 81-KA-1464.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Jan. 29, 1982.

      William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Marion B. Farmer, Dist. Atty., Abbott J. Reeves, William J. Knight, Peter J. Garcia, Asst. Dist. Attys., for plaintiff-appellee.
    S. Austin McElroy, Covington, for defendant-appellant.
   HALL, Justice Ad Hoc.

Appellants, Berlon Karl Crain and Darrell Spurlock, were jointly charged with armed robbery in violation of LSA-R.S. 14:64 and pled not guilty. After a hearing on appellants’ motions to suppress confessions made by each of them after they were arrested, the motions were denied. Defendant Crain was tried before a jury and was found guilty. Defendant Spurlock withdrew his plea of not guilty and pled guilty. Each defendant was sentenced to serve 15 years at hard labor without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence.

On appeal appellants rely upon one assignment of error for the reversal of their convictions and sentences. They contend that the confessions were the result of illegal, warrantless arrests without probable cause and that the trial court erred in denying their motions to suppress the confessions.

At noon or a few minutes after on March 9, 1979 an armed robbery took place at the rural home of Mrs. and Mrs. Walter A. Burris, an elderly couple. Two young black males knocked at their door, stated they were from Chicago and had been deer hunting with their dogs, and asked for a drink of water. As they were being given drinks of water a third young black male came from around the side of the house carrying an old taped-up single-barrel shotgun, announced that this was a stick-up, and ordered the couple to get up next to the wall. While one of the young men held the gun on the couple the other two went into the bedroom and took money from Mr. Burris’s billfold and then the three left the house on foot. Mrs. Burris telephoned the police through a number connected with some sort of alarm system and a deputy who was in the area arrived at the house within a very few minutes.

Mr. and Mrs. Burris gave investigating officers a description of the robbers, whom they did not recognize or know. They informed the officers of an incident which occurred earlier that morning while they were traveling home in their automobile on the Hackley Highway. At an intersection of the highway several miles from their home they saw several (three according to Mrs. Burris) young black males standing near the highway and one of them laid down across the highway in the path of the automobile in an apparent effort to stop the automobile. Mr. Burris drove around the young man lying down to avoid hitting him and then proceeded home. The couple thought the young men who robbed them were probably the same persons they encountered on the highway. The incident on the highway occurred in front of or close to defendant Crain’s home.

During the course of their investigation that afternoon, the officers talked to Clea Magee who had been seen driving in the vicinity of the Burris home. Magee informed the officers that within a few minutes of the time of the robbery he saw three young black males whom he identified as Crain, Spurlock, and Prentiss Magee, walking along the highway within a quarter of a mile of the Burris home and that the three young men attempted to get a ride with him.

Officers went to Spurlock’s home after dark between 7:30 and 8:30 p. m. They spoke to his father who brought Spurlock outside. Spurlock, 19 years of age, was advised that he was under arrest, was advised of his rights, and was taken to the Washington Parish Sheriff’s Office in Franklinton.

The officers also went to defendant Crain’s home but he wasn’t there. The officers asked his mother to have him call when he came in. Crain, 18 years of age, called in that evening and deputies went out and got him and took him to the sheriff’s office.

The third suspect, Prentiss Magee, a 16-year-old juvenile, was also brought to the jail and all three were questioned in separate offices. The gun was recovered from Magee’s home at about 10:00 in the evening.

A consent to questioning form was signed by Spurlock at 7:55 p. m. and another identical form was signed by him at 10:26 p. m. A tape recorded statement was taken from Spurlock at 10:41 p. m. in which statement he fully confessed to the robbery and implicated Crain and Magee. The recording reflects that Spurlock was informed of his rights and voluntarily consented to questioning.

A form acknowledging that he had been advised of his rights was signed by Crain at 10:30 p. m. A tape recorded statement was taken from Crain at 12:06 a. m. in which statement he fully confessed to the robbery. The recording reflects that he was advised of his rights and consented to the questioning.

A confession obtained as a direct result of an arrest made without probable cause should be suppressed. Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963). When the defendant challenges the admissibility of a confession on the ground that it was the result of an arrest made without probable cause, the burden of showing admissibility rests upon the prosecution. Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590, 95 S.Ct. 2254, 45 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975). This affirmative showing must be made by establishing that probable cause existed to arrest the defendant or, if the arrest was unlawful, by showing that the causal connection between it and the subsequently obtained confession was so attenuated that the confession could not properly be considered as a fruit of the illegal arrest. Wong Sun v. United States, supra; State v. Scott, 355 So.2d 231 (La.1977).

Any lawful arrest whether war-rantless or pursuant to an arrest warrant must be based upon probable cause to believe that the person arrested has committed or is committing an offense. State v. Scott, supra. Although the measure of probable cause does not require that the arresting officer have sufficient proof to convict the accused, the arrest may not be predicated upon mere suspicion. State v. Scott, supra; State v. Randolph, 337 So.2d 498 (La.1976). Probable cause is to be judged by the probabilities and practical considerations of everyday life on which average men, particularly average police officers, can be expected to act. State v. Smith, 377 So.2d 1220 (La.1979). One of the most important elements in determining whether probable cause existed is satisfied when the police know a crime has actually been committed; when the arrest is made when the police do not know that a crime has been committed, more and better evidence is needed to prove that probable cause exists for the arrest than is the case when the police know a crime has been committed. State v. Johnson, 363 So.2d 684 (La.1978).

The question in this case is, then, whether there was probable cause to arrest Spurlock and Crain at the time they were arrested and taken to the jail. We conclude there was probable cause, as did the district judge whose conclusions as to probable cause are entitled to great weight. State v. Nicholas, 397 So.2d 1308 (La.1981).

The officers knew that a crime had been committed. They knew that Mr. and Mrs. Burris had been robbed at gunpoint by three young black males at their home shortly after noon. The officers had descriptions of the culprits given to them by Mr. and Mrs. Burris. They had information from the Burrises that the three robbers were probably the same young men who the couple had seen down the road earlier that morning and who had apparently at that time tried to stop them in their car. They knew that the three young men had left the Burris home on foot. The officers had information from a witness that the defendants and another young black male were seen on foot about a quarter mile from the scene of the robbery within a very minutes of the time of the robbery. The general description of the three robbers given by the victims matched the general description of the three suspects. The officers knew the incident where the young men tried to stop the Burris car occurred in front of or close to Crain’s home.

The information that the officers had was sufficient to justify reasonable men of average caution in believing that the three young men, Crain, Spurlock, and Magee, seen together on foot close to the scene of the robbery and close in point of time with the robbery, were the same three young men who committed the robbery. The officers had probable cause to make the arrests. The confessions were not, therefore, the fruits of illegal arrests and were admissible as evidence, and the motions to suppress were properly denied.

The defendants’ convictions and sentences are affirmed.

       Judges Pike Hall, Jr., Charles A. Marvin, and Jasper E. Jones of the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, participated in this decision as associate justices ad hoc, joined by Chief Justice John A. Dixon, Jr., and Associate Justices Walter F. Marcus, Jr., Fred A. Blanche, Jr., and Harry T. Lemmon.

      . Appellants made other assignments of error which have not been argued in brief and are, therefore, considered abandoned. State v. Blanton, 325 So.2d 586 (La.1976).
      It is not clear from the record, which does not contain a transcript of the proceedings at which defendant Spurlock changed his plea, that he reserved his right to urge his motion to suppress on appeal. See State v. Crosby, 338 So.2d 584 (La.1976). However, since the state has not questioned defendant’s right to assert this assignment of error on appeal and since we have determined that the assignment has no merit, the question of defendant Spurlock’s reservation of rights in this regard has not been specifically determined and passed on by the court.


author: PER CURIAM.

text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Joseph HOLMES.
    No. 81-KA-1716.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Feb. 3, 1982.
    William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Francis Dugas, Dist. Atty., John J. Erny, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
    Thomas J. Divens, Gretna, for defendant-appellant.
   PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DIXON, C. J., dissents.


text:
    Buering GUILLORY v. UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY INSURANCE COMPANY.
    No. 81-C-2471.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Jan. 11, 1981.
   In re Buering Guillory, applying for writs of certiorari or review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of St. Landry. 401 So.2d 543.

Writ Granted.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Tommy PORTER v. Honorable Jerome M. WINSBERG, Judge, Section C, Criminal District Court and Honorable Harry F. Connick, District Attorney and State of Louisiana, et al.
    No. 81-KH-0705.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 5, 1981.
   In re Tommy Porter applying for writs of habeas corpus and mandamus. Parish of Orleans. Nos. 272-231, Section C and 272-443, Section C.

Denied. Appeal pending.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Alfred ISTRE.
    No. 81-K-2251.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Alfred Istre, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Tangipahoa.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Roosevelt PORTER.
    No. 81-K-2233.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re State of Louisiana, through the District Attorney, Harry F. Connick, applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition. Parish of Orleans. Juvenile Court No. 187-568 B.

Denied on showing made.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Henri DESROCHES v. Sidney D. TORRES.
    No. 81-KH-2194.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Henri Desroches, applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of St. Bernard. Nos. 52747 and 53624.

Denied. Moot.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Caster Dale SIMS.
    No. 81-K-2263.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Caster Dale Sims, applying for writs of review or certiorari. Parish of Claiborne. Nos. 13199,14000 and T-12601-81.

Denied. On the showing made. Defendant has the right to appeal.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. James Alton STOKES.
    No. 81-K-2265.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re James Alton Stokes, applying for writ of review. Parish of Terrebonne. No. 79857.

Denied on showing made.


text:
    Charles B. WELCH v. Ivy STEWART and A. J. Harrell.
    No. 81-C-2270.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re A. J. Harrell, applying for writ of certiorari, or review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Tangiphoa. No. 14148.'

Denied.

DENNIS and BLANCHE, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Chester M. LEE v. Frank C. BLACKBURN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-2021.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Chester M. Lee, applying for writs remedial writs. Parish of Orleans. No. 259-198.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Ervin Ray DENNY v. Frank BLACKBURN, Warden, et al., Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-2057.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Ervin Ray Denny, applying for writ of habeas corpus and/or supervisory writ. Parish of Concordia. No. 72-2055.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Charles Ucless FOBB v. Frank V. ZACCARIA, Judge of the 24th Judicial District Court, Parish of Jefferson, Gretna, Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2121.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Charles Ucless Fobb, applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Jefferson. Nos. 22547 and 22792.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Nathaniel Brooks LYINS v. J. D. MIDDLEBROOKS.
    No. 81-KH-1916.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Nathaniel Brooks Lyons, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Jefferson Davis. No. 1413-78.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Dallas CUSTARD v. Frank C. BLACKBURN, Warden Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-2076.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Dallas Custard, applying for writ of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus or habeas corpus. Parish of Jefferson. No. 75-642.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Reginald DUNCAN v. Honorable Judge Charles WARD, Criminal District Court and Clerks Office and Attorney, Paul Katz, O.I.D.P.
    No. 81-KH-1788.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Reginald Duncan, applying for writs of mandamus. Parish of Orleans. No. 257-602.

Writ denied.


text:
    Louis BELLARD, et al. v. MOWATA RICE DRIER, INC. Carl SLOAN, et al. v. MOWATA RICE DRIER, INC.
    No. 81-C-2256.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Louis Bellard, et al., and Carl Sloan, et al., applying for writ of certiorari, or review. Parish of Acadia. 400 So.2d 735.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Rudolph THOMPSON, Jr. v. Frank C. BLACKBURN, Warden Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-2071.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Rudolph Thompson, Jr., applying for writ of habeas corpus and/or writ of review, writ of mandamus. Parish of Ouachita. No. 62-101.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION & DEVELOPMENT v. Charles DAVIS, et al.
    No. 81-C-2255.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Charles Davis, et al., applying for writ of certiorari, or review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Lafayette. 400 So.2d 926.

Denied.


text:
    Richard Craig DOTY and Tammy Deshotel v. SAFECO INSURANCE CO. et al. Billy Edward CHAUDOIR, et al. v. Mr. and Mrs. Joseph THERIOT, et al.
    No. 81-C-2093.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Bituminous Casualty Corporation, applying for writ of certiorari, to the Third Circuit, Court of Appeal. 400 So.2d 718 and 400 So.2d 730.

Denied.

MARCUS, BLANCHE and LEMMON, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    Claudia DOWNS v. RAPIDES GENERAL HOSPITAL and United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company.
    No. 81-C-1743.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Claudia Downs, applying for writs of certiorari, or review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Rapides. 398 So.2d 116.

Denied.

DIXON, C. J. and CALOGERO, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel., Royal A. EVERY v. Frank BLACKBURN, et al., Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-1959.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 16, 1981.
   In re Royal A. Every, applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of Orleans. No. 250-228.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Lee J. BROUSSARD.
    No. 81-K-2798.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Oct. 23, 1981.
   In re Lee J. Broussard, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and for a stay order. Parish of Acadia. No. 34803.

Bond (bail) reduced to $150,000.00.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Kody ROY.
    No. 81-K-2872.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 3, 1981.
   In re Kody Roy, applying for writ of review, or certiorari and a stay order. Parish of Jefferson Davis. Number unknown.

Bond is fixed in the amount of $5000.00.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. William B. TAYLOR.
    No. 81-K-2859.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 3, 1981.
   In re William B. Taylor, applying for writ of review. Parish of Terrebonne. No. 115681 and 115684.

Granted. Bond reduced to $50,000.


author: CALOGERO, J.,

text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Joseph CITIZEN.
    No. 81-K-2880.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 5, 1981.
   In re State of Louisiana, through the District Attorney, Leonard Knapp, applying for writ of review, and stay order. Parish of Calcasieu. No. 13493-80.

Writ granted. The ruling of the trial judge on the admissibility of the testimony of the deceased witness is reversed. The prosecution, however, will introduce the evidence at the state’s risk, for the reason that a majority of this court might, on appeal in the event of conviction, overrule those judges present and ruling on this application.

CALOGERO, J.,

dissents, not being convinced that the trial judge’s ruling was incorrect.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Ricky MATTHEWS.
    No. 81-K-2843.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 5, 1981.
   In re Ricky Matthews, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Madison Parish.

Granted. Bond reduced to $15,000 total.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Dalton PREJEAN v. Frank C. BLACKBURN.
    No. 81-K-2802.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 6, 1981.
   In re Dalton Prejean, applying for supervisory and other writs and a stay order. Parish of Lafayette. No. unknown. Venue changed to Ouachita Parish.

Further proceedings in this case are stayed pending further action of this Court.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Martha E. MINNIEWEATHER, in her Capacity as Attorney for Barbara Robinson.
    No. 81-K-2858.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 1981.
   In re Martha E. Minnieweather, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Ouachita Parish. No. 39986.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Clifton THIBODEAUX.
    No. 81-K-2878.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 9, 1981.
   In re Clifton Thibodeaux, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of St. Landry. No. 36884.

On the showing made, denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Scott SKINNER.
    No. 81-K-2909.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 10, 1981.
   In re Scott Skinner, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Parish of Jefferson. No. 81-2436.

On the showing made the application is denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Henry JOHNSTON, Charles Johnston and L. B. Johnston.
    No. 81-K-2911.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 11, 1981.
   In re Henry Johnston, Charles Johnston and L. B. Johnston, applying for writ of certiorari, or review. Parish of Sabine. Nos. 1007, 1008, and 1009.

Granted. The order of the trial court denying bail reduction is reversed. Bail is fixed in the. following amounts:

Henry Johnston $75,000

Charles Johnston $50,000

L. B. Johnston $60,000


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Rene PERKINS.
    No. 81-K-2904.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 11, 1981.
   In re Rene Perkins, applying for writ of certiorari. Parish of Orleans. No. 281-292.

Denied. Contrary to relator’s contention, the Legislature has made provision for detention and custody of juveniles who are subject to the jurisdiction of the district court pending determination of guilt or innocence. See R.S. 13:1571.10 (acts 1980, No. 482 § 1).


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Vincent J. LAPRIME.
    No. 81-K-2929.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 12, 1981.
   In re Vincent J. Laprime, applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition. Parish of St. Bernard. No. 53-180.

Denied.


text:
    William HOEFLY and Joann C. Hoefly v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
    No. 81-C-2770.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 12, 1981.
   In re William Hoefly and Joann C. Hoefly, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit. Parish of Bossier. 403 So.2d 853.

Granted and calendared with 81-C-1888 and 81-C-2066. Order attached.


text:
    W. F. HENRY, Jr., Individually and as Trustee for J. A. and Martha Davis Trust, et al. v. The BALLARD AND CORDELL CORPORATION, et al. and Milford A. ROGERS v. Wiley P. BALLARD, Jr., et al.
    No. 81-C-2364.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re W. F. Henry, Jr., et al., applying for writ of certiorari, or review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Cameron. 401 So.2d 600 and 401 So.2d 610.

Writ granted.


text:
    George J. CHAMPAGNE, Jr., et al. v. Andrew BROUSSARD, et ux. Andrew BROUSSARD, et ux v. George J. CHAMPAGNE, Jr., et al.
    No. 81-C-2439.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re George J. Champagne, Jr., Yvonne Anderson Champagne, Vance J. Theriot, Gloria Royer Theriot, Robert R. Laville, Sr., and Joyce Theriot Laville, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of St. Martin. 401 So.2d 1060 and 401 So.2d 1067.

Denied.

MARCUS and WATSON, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    Ray BAMBURG v. Dolores G. LAVIGNE.
    No. 81-C-2589.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Ray Bamburg, applying for writ of certiorari, or review, to the Second Circuit, Court of Appeal. 403 So.2d 827.

Writ denied.

MARCUS and BLANCHE, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    Carolyn Simoneaux VICCINELLI v. Ronald L. CAUSEY.
    No. 81-C-2574.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Ronald L. Causey, applying for writ of certiorari, or review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge. 401 So.2d 1243.

Denied.


text:
    Frank LEWIS v. Robert Franklin AULT, et al.
    No. 81-C-2573.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Robert Franklin Ault, applying for writ of certiorari, or review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge. 401 So.2d 1252.

Writ denied.


text:
    Joseph Jerry BATISTE v. POINTE COUPEE CONSTRUCTORS, INC., et al.
    No. 81-C-2572.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Joseph Jerry Batiste, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge. 401 So.2d 1263.

Writ denied.

CALOGERO, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Robert CLAY v. BITUMINOUS CASUALTY CORPORATION.
    No. 81-C-2571.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Robert Clay, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Terrebonne. 401 So.2d 1257.

Writ denied.


text:
    Christopher KNOCKUM, et al. v. AMOCO OIL COMPANY, et al. Claiborne WHITE, Jr., et al. v. AMOCO OIL COMPANY, et al.
    No. 81-C-2548.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Amoco Oil Company and The Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Ascension. 402 So.2d 90.

Denied.


text:
    Christopher KNOCKUM, et al. v. AMOCO OIL COMPANY, et al. Claiborne WHITE, Jr., et al. v. AMOCO OIL COMPANY, et al.
    No. 81-C-2551.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Bernice Holmes, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Ascension. 402 So.2d 90.

Denied.


text:
    Emily Deen NELSON v. Robert POWERS, Jr., Willie J. Mouton, Affiliated Foods, Incorporated, United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Highlands Insurance Company, Christopher C. Watkins, Greyhound Lines, Incorporated, Floy Lee Fudge, Jr., and Slaughter Transport Corporation.
    No. 81-C-2556.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Emily Deen Nelson, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Iberville. 402 So.2d 129.

Denied.

DIXON, C. J., CALOGERO and LEM-MON, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    Succession of Hugh J. BRUMFIELD.
    No. 81-C-2447.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re John F. Brumfield, Jr. applying for writ of certiorari, or review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Calcasieu. 401 So.2d 1055.

Denied.


text:
    SCOTT TRUCK AND TRACTOR COMPANY OF ALEXANDRIA, INC. v. Billy W. DANIEL, et al.
    No. 81-C-2452.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re James Domengeaux, Bob F. Wright and G. L. Dozier, Individually and d/b/a Meade Plantation, applying for writs of certiorari or review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Rapides. 401 So.2d 590.

Denied.

MARCUS and WATSON, JJ., would grant.


text:
    Wilbert LeBLANC, Jr. v. CONSOLIDATED ALUMINUM COMPANY.
    No. 81-C-2464.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Wilbert LeBlanc, Jr., applying for remedial or supervisory writs of certiorari, review and mandamus, to the Third Circuit, Court of Appeal. Parish of Calcasieu. 401 So.2d 1082.

Writ denied.

DIXON, C. J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Richard R. BRASSEAUX v. STAND-BY CORPORATION, d/b/a Plantation Inn and Home Indemnity Company.
    No. 81-C-2521.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Richard R. Brasseaux, applying for writs of certiorari or review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of St. Mary. 402 So.2d 140.

Denied.

DENNIS, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Florence Morris RANDAZZO v. Matthew J. RANDAZZO, III.
    No. 81-C-2543.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Matthew J. Randazzo, III, applying for writs of certiorari or review, to the First Circuit Court of Appeal. Parish of Ascension. 401 So.2d 1255.

Denied.


text:
    Frank G. RIEGER v. Billy Gene NORWOOD.
    No. 81-C-2547.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Billy Gene Norwood, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Ascension. 401 So.2d 1272.

Denied.


text:
    Henry E. YOES, Jr. and St. Charles Herald, Inc. v. ST. CHARLES PARISH COUNCIL.
    No. 81-C-2161.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Henry E. Yoes, Jr. and St. Charles Herald, Inc., applying for writ of certiorari to review to the Fourth Circuit, Court of Appeal. Parish of St. Charles. 400 So.2d 260.

Writ denied.


text:
    Mr. and Mrs. James D. WATKINS v. IMAGE INTERNATIONAL INC., et al.
    No. 81-C-2529.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Mr. and Mrs. James D. Watkins, applying for supervisory and remedial writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 211817.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Lucille ROGERS.
    No. 81-K-2515.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Lucille Rogers, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Tangipahoa. No. 45073.

The sentence is set aside, and the case is remanded for resentencing, C.Cr.P. Art. 894. Otherwise, denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Anthony WILLIS v. Donna M. McGEHEE, Custodian of Records, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-2331.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Anthony Willis, applying for writs of certiorari-mandamus. Parish of Lafayette. No. 89331.

Writ denied. Relator must first make application for relief in the 19th Judicial District Court. See La.R.S. 15:571.15.


text:
    Leonard B. JACKS v. BANISTER PIPELINES AMERICA, et al.
    No. 81-C-2296.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Leonard B. Jacks, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge. 396 So.2d 604.

Granted.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. George GRIFFON.
    No. 81-K-2754.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re George Griffon, applying for writs of mandamus, certiorari, and review. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 1-80-868.

Denied.

BLANCHE, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. A SMALL BROWN SUITCASE.
    No. 81-K-2791.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re John Kent Sullivan, applying for writ of certiorari, review and mandamus. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 12-79-303.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Michael LOVING.
    No. 81-K-2871.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Michael Loving, applying for writ of certiorari and stay Order. Parish of Orleans. No. 282-118.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Leroy F. OLSEN.
    No. 81-K-2523.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Leroy F. Olsen, applying for writs of certiorari. Parish of Orleans. No. 281-217.

Denied. Adequate remedy by review in event of conviction.


author: DIXON, C. J., and CALOGERO, J,

text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Travis Eugene BARKLEY v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2869.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Travis Eugene Barkley, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Terrebonne. Number unknown.

Denied.

DIXON, C. J., and CALOGERO, J,

would grant the writ and furnish relator’s lawyer one of the three copies of the transcript in this Court. (Relator’s lawyer is free at any time to withdraw a copy of the transcript and deliver it to his client.)


text:
    Laverne TIPTON v. Dr. Clinton LEWIS, et al.
    No. 81-C-2518.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Dr. Russell 0. Rigby and Willis-Knighton Memorial Hospital, applying for writs of certiorari and review, to the Second Circuit, Court of Appeal. No. 14591. Parish of Caddo.

Writ denied.


text:
    Kim MANZELLA, Wife of Henry L. Klein v. Henry L. KLEIN.
    No. 81-C-2827.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Kim Manzella, wife of Henry L. Klein, applying for supervisory writs, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Jefferson. No. 12823.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Herbert LITTLE.
    No. 81-K-2823.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Herbert Little, applying for remedial writ of certiorari. Parish of Orleans. No. 284-290 J.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel., Larry JAMES v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2822.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Larry James, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Terrebonne. Nos. 112079 and 112080.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. John HOWARD and Carl Hill, Et Cetra.
    No. 81-K-2813.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re John Howard and Carl Hill, applying for supervisory writs of mandamus, certiorari, review and a stay order. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 4-81-1092.

Denied. Adequate remedy upon review in event of conviction.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Calvin L. WYSE.
    No. 81-K-2517.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Calvin Wyse, applying for remedial writs. Parish of LaSalle. No. 23575.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Rodney Wayne MACON v. CLERK OF CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, CADDO PARISH.
    No. 81-KH-2344.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Rodney Wayne Macon, applying for Writ of Mandamus. Parish of Caddo. No. 112549.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Houston M. WISENBAKER, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2795.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Houston M. Wisenbaker, Jr., applying for remedial writs. Parish of Rapides. Number unknown.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Frasher WILLIAMS.
    No. 81-K-2797.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Frasher Williams, applying for writ of Habeas Corpus. Parish of Orleans. No. 279-451.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Lawrence ARABIE.
    No. 81-K-2516.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Lawrence Arabie, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Tangipahoa.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel., Rickey ROGERS v. CLERK OF COURT, 19th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE.
    No. 81-KH-2353.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Rickey Rogers, applying for writ of mandamus. East Baton Rouge Parish. No. 4-78-21.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Eugene N. SPENCER v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2368.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Eugene N. Spencer, applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of Orleans. No. M112729.

Denied. Moot. We are informed relator has been released.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Isaac BRAZIL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2500.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Isaac Brazil, applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of Orleans. No. 256-058.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Anthony Lee RUSSELL v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2308.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Anthony Lee Russell, applying for remedial writs. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No 2-81-153.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. James Oliver RAPHIEL v. Paul CARMOUCHE, D.A., 1st Judicial District Court, Parish of Caddo, State of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2300.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re James Oliver Raphiel, applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Caddo. No. 280089.

Denied. Civil matter. Relator should first seek relief from the Court of Appeal.

DIXON, C. J., and WATSON, J., dissent.


text:
    Joseph Jerry BATISTE v. Rodney ROBILLARD, et al.
    No. 81-C-2569.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Joseph Jerry Batiste, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 14275.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Joey SIZEMORE v. Robert L. “Bob” STEWART and Carolyn Jones.
    No. 81-KH-2577.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Joey Sizemore, applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Rapides. No. 168807.

Denied. Moot.


text:
    Elizabeth Louise Mayo BRITTON v. Albert J. BRITTON, et al.
    No. 81-C-2585.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Albert J. Britton, applying for cer-tiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit. Parish of Ouachita. No. 14617.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Alton DAILEY.
    No. 81-K-2599.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Alton Dailey, applying for supervisory writs. Parish of Pointe Coupee. Nos. 26635 and 26639.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Jerry BALDWIN.
    No. 81-K-2600.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Jerry Baldwin, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Caddo. No. 115982.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Charles DOUGLAS.
    No. 81-K-2619.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Charles Douglas, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, and a stay order. Parish of Jefferson. No. 81-593.

Denied. Adequate remedy by review in event of conviction.

MARCUS, J., recused.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Ivan Leon MOLINARIO v. STATE of Louisiana Through the DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS.
    No. 81-KH-2667.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Ivan Leon Molinario, applying for writs of prohibition, supervisory, certiorari, mandamus, and stay order. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 249-313.

Denied. Forma pauperis complaint is moot. Otherwise, being a civil matter, application by relief should be made to Court of Appeal.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Fred Gary HEATH.
    No. 81-K-2718.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Fred Gary Heath, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Ascension. No. 848.

Writ denied. Relator has an adequate remedy by appeal in the event of conviction.

DIXON, C. J., and CALOGERO, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Clifton THIBODEAUX.
    No. 81-K-2930.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Clifton Thibodeaux, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Acadia.

Denied on the showing made. If the defense attorney provokes a hearing on a new motion to reduce bail and relief is not granted, relator may again apply to this Court pursuant to our supervisory jurisdiction.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Joseph WILSON v. Sheriff Euda DELCAMBRE.
    No. 81-KH-2563.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Joseph Wilson, applying for writ of habeas corpus. Vermilion Parish. No. 22019.

Denied.


text:
    William E. TILLEY v. RESULTS UNLIMITED, INC. d/b/a KBCL Radio, Scott Hodges and Jonn Doe and Jimmy Wilson.
    No. 81-C-2525.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re William E. Tilley, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Vernon. No. 8527.

Denied.

DIXON, C. J. and LEMMON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Don EASLEY.
    No. 81-K-2528.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Don Easley, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Tangipahoa. Nos. 45053, 45054, 45065, 45066, 45067 and 45086.

Writ denied.


text:
    The DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY v. Freddie H. PITRE, et al. Freddie H. PITRE, et al. v. LOUISIANA TAX COMMISSION.
    No. 81-C-2594.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Dow Chemical Company, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of Iberville. No. 14880.

Writ granted.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. John L. BULLOCK.
    No. 81-K-2593.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re State of Louisiana, through the District Attorney, Harry F. Connick, applying for writ of certiorari. Parish of Orleans. No. 278-946.

Writ granted.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Donnie ROSS.
    No. 81-K-2588.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Donnie Ross, applying for writ of review. Parish of Lafourche. No. 108960.

Granted. Conviction reversed. Insufficient evidence.


text:
    LOUISIANA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION v. Dudley A. PHILIPS, Jr.
    No. 81-O-2512.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Dudley A. Philips, Jr., applying for application to amend judgment and for reinstatement to the practice of law. Parish of Orleans. No. 252-061.

Granted. Judgment disbarring relator is amended to be made retroactive to September 14, 1977, date on which relator was suspended.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Jerry L. PENNYWELL v. W. Orie HUNTER, Jr. in his Official Capacity as Clerk of First Judicial District Court.
    No. 81-KH-2336.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Jerry L. Pennywell, applying for supervisory and remedial writs. Parish of Caddo. Number unknown.

Granted. Boykin transcript ordered furnished.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. DeWayne F. HALL v. Honorable Doug MOREAU, Judge 19th Judicial District Court.
    No. 81-KH-2224.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re DeWayne F. Hall, applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 11-78-670.

Granted. Relator’s application is transferred to the district court for action.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Oscar SAM, Jr. v. C. Paul PHELPS, Secretary Department of Corrections.
    No. 81-KH-1732.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Oscar Sam, Jr., applying for writs of mandamus. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 8883011.

Writ granted. The district judge is ordered to rule on defendant’s application.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Eugene JOHNSON, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2258.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Eugene Johnson, Jr., applying for remedial writs. Parish of Caddo. Number unknown.

Denied.


text:
    CITY OF WEST MONROE v. OUACHITA ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CHILDREN, INC. a/k/a Ouachita Association for Retarded Citizens.
    No. 81-C-2247.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re City of West Monroe, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit. Parish of Ouachita. No. 14655.

Denied.

MARCUS, BLANCHE and LEMMON, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Ronald TAUZIER and Glen Tauzier v. Presiding Judge, Thomas W. TANNER, Criminal District Court, 22nd Judicial District Court, St. Tammany Parish, Covington, State of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2152.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Ronald Tauzier and Glen Tauzier, applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of St. Tammany. No. 73474.

Writ denied. Relators application is pending in District Court.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Cordell KELLY v. CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS.
    No. 81-KH-2058.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Cordell Kelly, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Orleans. No. 264-793, Section J.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Freddie WILLIAMS v. Frank C. BLACKBURN.
    No. 81-KH-1807.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Freddie Williams, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 10-77-558.

Denied.

CALOGERO, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Davis BROWN, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-1159.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Davis Brown, Jr., applying for writs of certiorari. Parish of Orleans. No. 63,721.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. William Sherwood JOHNSON v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-1791.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re William Sherwood Johnson, applying for reconsideration of denied writ of September 9, 1981. Parish of Orleans. No. 263-196.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Charles D. DERANGER.
    No. 81-K-2499.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re State of Louisiana, applying for supervisory writs. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 10-80-152.

Not considered. Not timely filed.


text:
    In re Roland R. SELENBERG Applying for Reinstatement to the Louisiana State Bar.
    No. 81-0-2586.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Roland R. Selenberg, applying for reinstatement to the Louisiana State Bar.

Granted. Applicant is re-instated.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Warren RANGE.
    No. 81-K-2870.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Warren Range, applying for supervisory writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of East Baton Rouge. Nos. 6-81-566 and 6-81-567.

Granted. The trial court is instructed to direct the district attorney to permit the discovery or inspection or to grant other relief to defendant provided by law. The prosecution’s offer to allow review of its file does not constitute compliance with the specific requests of defendant to which it has been ordered to respond.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Stewart MARSHALL.
    No. 81-K-2856.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Stewart Marshall, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Parish of East Carroll. No. 22397.

Granted.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. John A. FONTENOT.
    No. 81-K-2809.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re John A. Fontenot, applying for supervisory writ of certiorari and/or review. Parish of Ascension. Number unknown.

Granted and docket as appeal.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Thomas Duane BOONE.
    No. 81-K-2601.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Thomas Duane Boone, applying for writs of certiorari, review and mandamus. Parish of St. Landry. No. 35996.

Granted and reversed. Constitutionally insufficient evidence to convict.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Dennis L. McCABE.
    No. 81-K-2377.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Dennis L. McCabe, applying for supervisory writs and orders. Parish of Beauregard. No. CR 862-80.

Denied. In view of defendant’s conviction, he may raise the issue on appeal.


text:
    The OBESITY TREATMENT AND PREVENTION CENTER, INC. v. William A. CHERRY, Lidonna Guillot and Louisiana Bariatrics, Inc.
    No. 81-C-2805.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re William A. Cherry, Lidonna Guillot and Louisiana Bariatrics, Inc., applying for remedial writs, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Jefferson. No. 12798.

Writ denied.

CALOGERO and WATSON, JJ., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Herman LEONARD.
    No. 81-K-2424.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Herman Leonard, applying for writs of certiorari, writ of review, prohibition, and mandamus. Parish of Orleans. Number 281-679.

Denied on the showing made.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Robert THRIFT.
    No. 81-K[A]-2511.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Robert Thrift, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Orleans. No. 276-596.

Denied.


text:
    Rita Babin BRADY, et al. v. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, et al.
    No. 81-C-2445.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Anthony Bondio, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans. No. 12533.

Denied.

CALOGERO and WATSON, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    CITY OF LAFAYETTE v. Camille Joseph DELHOMME.
    No. 81-C-2463.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Camille Joseph Delhomme, applying for writ of certiorari to the Third Circuit, Court of Appeal. No. 8167. Parish of Lafayette.

Denied.

DENNIS, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. John Samuel DUNN.
    No. 81-K-2472.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re John Samuel Dunn, applying for supervisory review. Parish of Calcasieu. No. 7910-79.

Denied.


text:
    Donald G. GALLENT, C. P. A. v. STATE BOARD OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS OF LOUISIANA.
    No. 81-C-2475.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re State Board of Certified Public Accountants of Louisiana, applying for cer-tiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans. No. 11826.

Writ denied.

MARCUS, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Darly A. DANIELSON, et al. v. SCHWEGMANN BROTHERS GIANT SUPER MARKETS, INC.
    No. 81-C-2477.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Schwegmann Brothers Giant Super Markets, Inc., applying for writ of certiorari and review, to the Fourth Circuit, Court of Appeal. No. 11939. Parish of Jefferson.

Writ denied.

MARCUS, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Rita Babin BRADY, et al. v. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, et al.
    No. 81-C-2498.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 16, 1981.
   In re Rita Babin Brady, et al., applying for writ of certiorari, or review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans. No. 12533.

Denied.

WATSON and CALOGERO, JJ., would grant.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. MICHAEL LONZO.
    No. 81-K-2932.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 17, 1981.
   In re Michael Lonzo, applying for writs of certiorari and mandamus. Parish of Orleans. No. 115-780.

Denied. Treating this as an application by a person in custody by virtue of a court order, the petition alleges no grounds for relief.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Gerald NUCCIO.
    No. 81-K-2967.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 18, 1981.
   In re State of Louisiana, through the District Attorney, Jack Rowley, applying for writ of review and stay order. St. Bernard Parish. No. 53994.

Denied.

WATSON, BLANCHE and LEMMON, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Sharon ROMERO.
    No. 81-K-2963.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 18, 1981.
   In re Sharon Romero, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and for a stay order. Parish of Acadia. No. 34751.

Granted. Bond reduced to $25,000.00.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Roy JOHNSON.
    No. 81-K-2969.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 18, 1981.
   In re Roy Johnson, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Parish of Jefferson. No. 81-3257.

Granted. Line up ordered before trial.

MARCUS, J., dissents from the order.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Everett JONES.
    No. 81-K-2970.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 18, 1981.
   In re Everett Jones, applying for stay order and supervisory writs. Parish of Orleans. No. 285-589.

Granted. Requirement that bond be for cash or commercial surety only be vacated; otherwise denied.


author: WATSON, J.,

text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Barry D. PAYNE v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2948.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 19, 1981.
   In re Barry D. Payne, applying for Motion for Bond Reduction. Parish of Terrebonne.

Denied on the showing made.

WATSON, J.,

would grant and reduce the bail bond which is excessive for the charge of simple burglary.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Albert MANUAL.
    No. 81-K-2978.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 19, 1981.
   In re Albert Manual, applying for writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and stay order. Parish of Orleans. No. 283-873.

Writ denied. Adequate remedy by appeal in event of conviction.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Keith BROWN.
    No. 81-K-2971.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 20, 1981.
   In re Keith Brown, applying for writ of certiorari and remedial writ. Orleans Parish. No. 284-107.

Denied.


text:
    In re Lawrence B. FABACHER, II.
    No. 81-O-2707.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Lawrence B. Fabacher, II, applying for review of disciplinary rule 2-105 of the code of professional responsibility, or, alternatively, of the practices of the committee on professional responsibility of the Louisiana State Bar Association in enforcing disciplinary rule 2-105. Parish of Orleans.

Relator’s application is Denied since under today’s adoption by this Court of [the] Committee On Professional Responsibility’s proposed amendments to DR 2-101(D) and DR 2-105 relator may advertise that he practices in a specific area of the law.


text:
    Sherman A. BERNARD, as Rehabilitator of First Republic Life Insurance Company v. PIKE BURDEN, INC., et al. Al J. RANSOME and Marie D. Ransome v. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT INC., et al.
    No. 81-C-2554.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re John C. Anderson, Lawrence R. Anderson, Jr. and Jack Roberts, Jr., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge. 401 So.2d 1218.

Granted. Ruling of court of appeal set aside. Judgment of district court granting judgment on the pleadings reinstated.


text:
    Sherman A. BERNARD, as Rehabilitator of First Republic Life Insurance Company v. PIKE BURDEN, INC., et al. Al J. RANSOME and Marie D. Ransome v. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT INC. et al.
    No. 81-C-2555.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Special Development Inc., applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit. Parish of East Baton Rouge. 401 So.2d 1218.

Granted. Ruling of court of appeal set aside. Judgment of district court granting judgment on the pleadings reinstated.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. John KINGSBURY v. Frank BLACKBURN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-2222.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re John Kingsbury, applying for writ of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus or habeas corpus. Parish of Jefferson. No. 80-153.

Granted and remanded. Trial judge ordered to vacate habitual offender sentence and to resentence defendant in accordance with law as provided in La.R.S. 15:529.1.


author: DENNIS, J.,

text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Toxie H. COURTNEY, Jr. and Toxie H. Courtney, III.
    No. 81-K-2711.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Toxie H. Courtney, Jr., and Toxie H. Courtney, III, applying for writ of cer-tiorari. St. Tammany Parish. Nos. 84830; 84831; 84832; 84833 and 84834.

Granted and remanded to correct illegal sentence as to Toxie Courtney, Jr. See R.S. 14:103 as of time of offense. Otherwise denied

DIXON, C.J., and CALOGERO, J., would grant the writ.

DENNIS, J.,

would grant the writ and docket case for argument on question of whether spilling or throwing a drink on a person constitutes a battery under our law.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Private Melvin LAKE.
    No. 81-K-2751.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Private Melvin Lake, applying for writ of review and certiorari, to the 19th Judicial District Court. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 12-80-734.

Denied.

DENNIS, J.,

would grant the writ. Petitioner has been subjected to imprisonment and forfeiture of rights without a judicial review based upon a complete record of all the evidence upon which the Judgment was based. La.Const. Art. 1, Sec. 19.

LEMMON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    Willie ROBINSON v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY.
    No. 81-C-2714.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Willie Robinson applying for writ of certiorari, or review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Natchitoches. 404 So.2d 306.

Denied.


text:
    Gary E. PICOU v. Salvatore FERRARA, et al.
    No. 81-C-2705.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of Orleans. 404 So.2d 1265.

Granted.


text:
    In re Edward P. AHRENS, III. In re Steven R. ZACHARY and Judith E. Zachary.
    No. 81-C-2708.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Steven R. Zachary and Judith E. Zachary, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit. Parish of Caddo. Nos. 14620 and 14619.

Denied.


text:
    Elton DEVILLE v. Russel ZAUNBRECHER and the Edwards Law Firm.
    No. 81-C-2403.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Elton Deville, applying for reconsideration of denied writ. Court of Appeal, Third Circuit. Parish of Acadia. 406 So.2d 628.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Richard Glen READO.
    No. 81-K-2446.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Richard Glen Reado, applying for writ of mandamus and supervisory writs. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 3-81-265.

Writ denied. The Court has been advised that a preliminary hearing has been conducted.


text:
    CITY OF BATON ROUGE v. Herb JOHNSON (In Proper Person).
    No. 81-K-2550.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Herb Johnson, applying for writs of certiorari. Parish of East Baton Rouge. No. 7-81-232.

Writ denied.

DIXON, C. J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Warren James CAIN, Jr. v. Frank C. BLACKBURN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-2564.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Warren James Cain, Jr., applying for writ of habeas corpus. Jefferson Davis Parish.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Bruce JAMESON.
    No. 81-K-2603.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Bruce Jameson, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Caddo. No. 114726.

Denied.


text:
    Walter E. WILLIAMS, et al. v. The CITY OF WEST MONROE.
    No. 81-C-2604.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re The City of West Monroe, applying for certiorari, or, writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit. Parish of Ouachita. No. 14615.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Ardis T. ALLEN, III.
    No. 81-K-2632.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Ardis T. Allen, III, applying for writ of certiorari. Parish of Webster. No. 46738.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Gary Ray HORTON.
    No. 81-K-2637.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Gary Ray Horton, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Sabine. No. 26072.

Denied. Relator must first apply to district court.


text:
    William C. DONALD v. Frank BLACKBURN, Warden.
    No. 81-K-2646.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re William C. Donald, applying for writs of certiorari. Parish of Vernon. No. 25091.

Denied.

LEMMON, J., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Eddie Wayne WARD.
    No. 81-K-2425.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Eddie Wayne Ward, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. Parish of Ouachita. Nos. M45686, M45687 and M45688.

Motion to dismiss granted.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Tommy PORTER v. Honorable Jerome M. WINSBERG, Judge, Section C, Criminal District Court, and Harry F. Connick, District Attorney, et al.
    No. 81-KH-2099.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Tommy Porter, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Orleans. Nos. 272-231 and 272-443.

“Reconsideration denied. Heretofore, when the Court denied relief on June 5, 1981, it was properly denied on the basis that there was a pending appeal. Subsequently, this Court granted a defense motion to withdraw the appeal on August 4, 1981. Therefore, the claims presented may now be considered on their merits. However, the claims must be presented anew to the district court for its consideration.”


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Edward MANUEL.
    No. 81-K-2229.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Edward Manuel, applying for reconsideration of denied writ. Parish of Calcasieu. No. 9737-77.

Reconsideration denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Dave MONZINGO.
    No. 80-K-2691.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Dave Monzingo, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and stay order. Parish of Bossier. No. T-3291-80.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Samuel PROCTER v. CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, Honorable Frank J. Shea, Judge Section “G” Orleans Parish, State of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-0605.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Samuel Procter, applying for motion to proceed in forma pauperis and writ of mandamus. Parish of Orleans. No. 173-247.

Denied. Moot.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. James WILKENS, Jr. v. Frank J. SHEA, Judge, Section “G”, Criminal District Court, Parish of Orleans.
    No. 81-KH-0799.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re James Wilkens, Jr., applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Orleans. No. 205-804.

Denied. Moot.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Darrell Lynn CUMMINS.
    No. 81-K[A]-1009.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Darrell Lynn Cummins, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Ouachita. No. 39585.

Denied.

CALOGERO and WATSON, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. Darrell Lynn CUMMINS.
    No. 81-K[A]-1010.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Darrell Lynn Cummins, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Ouachita. No. 39426.

Denied.

CALOGERO and WATSON, JJ., would grant the writ.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Merlin M. RENARD, Jr. v. Judge Frank SHEA, Section G Criminal District Court, Parish of Orleans.
    No. 81-KH-1157.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Merlin M. Renard, Jr., applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Orleans. No. 264-958, Section G.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Reginald WRIGHT v. Frank MARULLO, Jr., Judge Criminal District Court Section “D” Orleans Parish, Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-1160.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Reginald Wright, applying for writs of mandamus. Parish of Orleans. No. 254-559.

Writ denied. Moot.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Terrance BUTLER v. Frank BLACKBURN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-1170.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Terrance Butler, applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus or ha-beas corpus. Parish of Orleans. Nos. 268-674 and 268-673.

Writ denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Maurice GIBBS v. Warden Frank C. BLACKBURN, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-Kh-1505.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Maurice Gibbs, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Orleans. No. 255-403.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Hillary PRESTON v. C. P. PHELPS, Department of Corrections.
    No. 81-KH-1550.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Hillary Preston, applying for writs of mandamus. Parish of Orleans.

Denied. Moot.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Cyril A. BROWN v. Frank SHEA, Judge, Section “G” Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-1605.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Cyril A. Brown, applying for writs of mandamus. Parish of Orleans. No. 263-551.

Denied. Moot.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Sterling COLLINS a/k/a James Taylor v. Frank C. BLACKBURN, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-1793.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Sterling Collins a/k/a James Taylor, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Orleans. No. 237-931.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Abraham BONIER, Jr. v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-1928.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Abraham Bonier, Jr., applying for remedial writs. Parish of Rapides. No. 172-724.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Clarence HUBBARD v. STATE of Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-1933.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Clarence Hubbard, applying for writs of certiorari. Parish of Orleans. No. 270-915.

Writ denied. Relator must first file this petition in the district court.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. James C. BRUMFIELD v. Frank BLACKBURN, Warden Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-2123.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re James C. Brumfield, applying for writs of certiorari, habeas corpus and mandamus. Parish of Calcasieu. No. 7844-73.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Dennis PURSELL v. Jack DONNELLY, Warden Dixon Correctional Institute.
    No. 81-KH-2135.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Dennis Pursell, applying for writ of certiorari. Parish of Jefferson. No. 74-1560.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Hanson Joseph BOYKINS v. Frank C. BLACKBURN, Warden, et al.
    No. 81-KH-2155.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Hanson Joseph Boykins, applying for writs of certiorari and habeas corpus. Parish of Terrebonne. No. 84-477.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Vorice CHARLES v. Frank BLACKBURN, Warden Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 81-KH-2157.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Vorice Charles, applying for writ of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and habe-as corpus. Parish of Acadia. No. 31016.

Denied.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Kevin Edward SEWARD v. Honorable Oliver P. SCHULINGKAMP, Judge, Section “F”, Criminal District Court, New Orleans, Louisiana.
    No. 81-KH-2136.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Kevin Edward Seward, applying for writ' of review, and motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Parish of Orleans. No. 263-196.

Writ granted. Trial court is ordered to supply relator with additional portions of transcript requested.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Chester BENNETT v. Hayden J. DEES, Warden, Dixon Correctional Institute.
    No. 81-KH-2138.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Chester Bennett, applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Jefferson Davis.

Granted. The district court is ordered to act on defendant’s application within 30 days.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Eddie Lee WADDLES v. W. Orie HUNTER, Jr., Clerk of Court, Parish of Caddo.
    No. 81-KH-2218.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Eddie Lee Waddles, applying for remedial writs. Parish of Caddo. No. 98878.

Granted. The trial court is hereby ordered to furnish relator a verbatim transcript of relator’s sentencing hearing upon receipt of payment of the cost thereof by the clerk.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana, ex rel. Robin E. WILLIAMS v. Kenneth RAINES, Esq., Asst. District Attorney, State of Louisiana and Honorable John R. Joyce, Judge, and Austin T. Goddnight, Official Court Reporter, and Frank C. Blackburn, Warden, Angola State Penitentiary, and State of Louisiana, et al.
    No. 81-KH-2240.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Robin E. Williams, applying for writ of habeas corpus. Parish of Morehouse. No. 27305.

Granted. An evidentiary hearing to determine if relator should be granted an out of time appeal is ordered.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Wilma J. BAZILE v. Honorable Charles R. WARD, Judge, Criminal District Court.
    No. 81-KH-2241.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re Wilma J. Bazile, applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Orleans. No. 253-642.

Writ granted. District Court is ordered to furnish relator a copy of his Boykin examination.


text:
    STATE of Louisiana v. James E. MEDDOCK.
    No. 81-K-2596.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Nov. 27, 1981.
   In re James E. Meddock, applying for writs of review. Parish of Jefferson. No. 81-1418.

Writ granted. The trial court ruling refusing to suppress evidence of the blood alcohol test is reversed. The case is remanded for retrial of the motion at which time state must produce the form required to be executed by R.S. 32:661 C or establish that it was executed and that there is a valid reason for its non-production.