State ex rel. Cooper v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State ex rel. Cooper v. State

660 So. 2d 867, 1995 La. LEXIS 2304, 1995 WL 577670

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedSeptember 29, 1995

DocketNo. 94-KH-1550

StatusPublished

This text of 660 So. 2d 867 (State ex rel. Cooper v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State ex rel. Cooper v. State, 660 So. 2d 867, 1995 La. LEXIS 2304, 1995 WL 577670 (La. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Cooper, Jack Lee; — Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “F”, No. 209-754.

Writ granted; case remanded. The timeliness provisions of C.Cr.P. art. 930.8(A) 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 Foucha v. Cr.D.C., 93-1001 (La. 9/2/94), 642 So.2d 1274; State ex rel. Johnson v. Day, 92-0122 (La. 5/13/94), 637 So.2d 1062. The district court is therefore ordered to address the merits of relator’s claims in accordance with the procedures and guidelines set forth in State v. Desdunes, 579 So.2d 452 (La.1991); State v. Washington, 578 So.2d 1150 (La.1991) and State ex rel. Jackson v. Smith, 578 So.2d 1150 (La.1991).

JOHNSON, J., not on panel.

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

In re Cooper, Jack Lee; — Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “F”, No. 209-754.

Writ granted; case remanded. The timeliness provisions of C.Cr.P. art. 930.8(A) 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 Foucha v. Cr.D.C., 93-1001 (La. 9/2/94), 642 So.2d 1274; State ex rel. Johnson v. Day, 92-0122 (La. 5/13/94), 637 So.2d 1062. The district court is therefore ordered to address the merits of relator’s claims in accordance with the procedures and guidelines set forth in State v. Desdunes, 579 So.2d 452 (La.1991); State v. Washington, 578 So.2d 1150 (La.1991) and State ex rel. Jackson v. Smith, 578 So.2d 1150 (La.1991).

JOHNSON, J., not on panel.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

660 So. 2d 867, 1995 La. LEXIS 2304, 1995 WL 577670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-cooper-v-state-la-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack