State ex rel. Campbell v. Fourth Circuit, Court of Appeal

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State ex rel. Campbell v. Fourth Circuit, Court of Appeal

646 So. 2d 364, 1994 La. LEXIS 2761, 1994 WL 658859

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided November 18, 1994·No. No. 92-KH-1950·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

In re Campbell, Alvin; — Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “I”, No. 288-731; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 92KW-1201.

Writ granted. Relator moved the district court under LSA — C.Cr.P. art. 882 to correct an illegally lenient sentence and the district court denied the motion as untimely pursuant to LSA — C.Cr.P. art. 930.8(A). However, [365] the timeliness provisions 930.8(A) apply to applications for post-conviction relief made under La.C.Cr.P. arts. 924-930.8, and do not apply to motions to correct illegal sentences made under La.C.Cr.P. art. 882, which states that illegal sentences “may be corrected at any time.” State ex rel. Johnson v. Day, 637 So.2d 1062 (La.1994); cf. State v. Johnson, 220 La. 64, 55 So.2d 782 (1951). The district court is therefore ordered to address the merits of relator’s claims. of C.Cr.P. art.

WATSON, J., not on panel.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Campbell, Alvin; — Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “I”, No. 288-731; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 92KW-1201.

Writ granted. Relator moved the district court under LSA — C.Cr.P. art. 882 to correct an illegally lenient sentence and the district court denied the motion as untimely pursuant to LSA — C.Cr.P. art. 930.8(A). However, [365] the timeliness provisions 930.8(A) apply to applications for post-conviction relief made under La.C.Cr.P. arts. 924-930.8, and do not apply to motions to correct illegal sentences made under La.C.Cr.P. art. 882, which states that illegal sentences “may be corrected at any time.” State ex rel. Johnson v. Day, 637 So.2d 1062 (La.1994); cf. State v. Johnson, 220 La. 64, 55 So.2d 782 (1951). The district court is therefore ordered to address the merits of relator’s claims. of C.Cr.P. art.

WATSON, J., not on panel.

State ex rel. Campbell v. Fourth Circuit, Court of Appeal, 646 So. 2d 364, 1994 La. LEXIS 2761, 1994 WL 658859 (La. 1994).

Pincite

646 So. 2d 364 (State ex rel. Campbell v. Fourth Circuit, Court of Appeal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related