Narrative Opinion Summary
Richard Jordan, the plaintiff, applied for supervisory and/or remedial writs in the Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Division B, under case number 328-280, which was subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, case number 2008-K-0947. The court denied the application on the grounds that it was untimely, non-cognizable, and repetitive. Relevant statutes and case law cited include Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.8, State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330, State v. Parker, 98-0256, Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.3, and State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380, along with a reference to Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.4(D).
Legal Issues Addressed
Applicability of Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.8subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Article 930.8 was cited to support the denial of the application based on its untimeliness.
Reasoning: Relevant statutes and case law cited include Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.8, State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330, State v. Parker, 98-0256, Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.3, and State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380, along with a reference to Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.4(D).
Non-cognizable Claims under Louisiana Code of Criminal Proceduresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found the plaintiff's claims to be non-cognizable under the relevant legal framework, rendering the application inadmissible.
Reasoning: The court denied the application on the grounds that it was untimely, non-cognizable, and repetitive.
Relevance of State ex rel. Glover v. Statesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: This case was referenced to support the court's decision regarding the non-cognizability of the claims.
Reasoning: Relevant statutes and case law cited include Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.8, State ex rel. Glover v. State, 93-2330, State v. Parker, 98-0256, Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.3, and State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380, along with a reference to Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 930.4(D).
Repetitive Applications in Criminal Proceedingssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court ruled against the plaintiff's application due to its repetitive nature, indicating that the issues raised had been previously addressed.
Reasoning: The court denied the application on the grounds that it was untimely, non-cognizable, and repetitive.
Timeliness of Writ Applicationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court emphasized the importance of filing writ applications within the prescribed time limits. In this case, the plaintiff's application was denied for being untimely.
Reasoning: The court denied the application on the grounds that it was untimely, non-cognizable, and repetitive.