State ex rel. Sprinkle v. State
This text of 578 So. 2d 918 (State ex rel. Sprinkle 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.
Opinion
In re Sprinkle, Jimmy; — Plaintiff(s); applying for writ of mandamus and supervisory and/or remedial writs; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “I”, No. 244-896.
The relator represents that the district court has failed to act timely on a motion [919]*919for production of evidentiary hearing transcript he has filed on or about March 4, 1991. If relator’s representation is correct, the district court is ordered to consider and act on the motion. If relator’s representation is incorrect, the district court is ordered to accept, file and act upon the pleading which is herewith transferred to the district court.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
578 So. 2d 918, 1991 La. LEXIS 1170, 1991 WL 67498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-sprinkle-v-state-la-1991.