State ex rel. Loyden v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State ex rel. Loyden v. State

138 So. 3d 1235, 2014 WL 1876503, 2014 La. LEXIS 1107

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedMay 2, 2014

DocketNo. 2013-KH-1970

StatusPublished

This text of 138 So. 3d 1235 (State ex rel. Loyden 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. Loyden v. State, 138 So. 3d 1235, 2014 WL 1876503, 2014 La. LEXIS 1107 (La. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Loyden, Booker Earl; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 256385; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 13-00664.

Writ granted in part. The court of appeal is ordered to allow relator a reasonable amount of time to supplement his application with the appropriate supporting documentation and to (re)consider his pro se filing on the merits. See State v. Melon, 95-2209 (La 9/22/95), 660 So.2d 466 (“[Meaningful access to courts guaranteed by La. Const, art. I, §§ 2, 19 and 22 requires courts to accept and consider post-verdict pro se filings from represented defendants.”). In all other respects, the application is denied.

CLARK, J., would deny.

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

In re Loyden, Booker Earl; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Rapides, 9th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 256385; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 13-00664.

Writ granted in part. The court of appeal is ordered to allow relator a reasonable amount of time to supplement his application with the appropriate supporting documentation and to (re)consider his pro se filing on the merits. See State v. Melon, 95-2209 (La 9/22/95), 660 So.2d 466 (“[Meaningful access to courts guaranteed by La. Const, art. I, §§ 2, 19 and 22 requires courts to accept and consider post-verdict pro se filings from represented defendants.”). In all other respects, the application is denied.

CLARK, J., would deny.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 So. 3d 1235, 2014 WL 1876503, 2014 La. LEXIS 1107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-loyden-v-state-la-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack