State Of Louisiana v. Cameron Williams

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedJuly 22, 2019
Docket2019KW0643
StatusUnknown

This text of State Of Louisiana v. Cameron Williams (State Of Louisiana v. Cameron Williams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State Of Louisiana v. Cameron Williams, (La. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2019 KW 0643

VERSUS

CAMERON P. WILLIAMS JUL 222019

In Re: State of Louisiana, applying for supervisory writs,

22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany, No. 526, 869.

BEFORE: McCLENDON, HIGGINBOTHAM, AND LANIER, JJ.

WRIT GRANTED. The March 21, 2019, ruling of the trial

court granting the pro se motion to reconsider sentence " to the extent of my jurisdiction, to consider the matter" is reversed.

Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure article 881. 1( A)( 1) is triggered by operation of law," unless the trial court

specifically allows for a longer period." ( Emphasis added).

See State v. Williams, 2016- 0007 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 6/ 3/ 16), 2016 WL 3131664 ( unpublished), writ denied, 2016- 1280 ( La. 9/ 6/ 17), 226 So. 3d 433. In the instant case, on March 21, 2019,

the trial judge stated he intended to extend the time for filing a motion for reconsideration of sentence from thirty days to five years from resentencing. He did not, however, set forth that period at resentencing on September 29, 2015. Thus, the period for seeking reconsideration of sentence was thirty days from resentencing. See State v. Neville, 95- 0547 ( La. App. 4th Cir. 5/ 16/ 95), 655 So. 2d 785, 786- 88, writ denied, 95- 1521 ( La. 9/ 29/ 95), 660 So. 2d 851. The defendant filed a counseled motion for reconsideration of sentence during this period, and the motion was denied. The trial court is without jurisdiction to consider the pro se motion for reconsideration of sentence,

which is untimely and successive. See La. Code Crim. P. art.

916( 3); State v. Gedric, 99- 1213 ( La. App. 1st Cir. 6/ 3/ 99), 741 So. 2d 849, 852 ( per curiam), writ denied, 99- 1830 ( La. 11/ 5/ 99), 751 So. 2d 239 ("[ a] n ` out -of -time' motion to reconsider sentence is not contemplated by the Code of Criminal Procedure nor

allowed by the jurisprudence."); State v. Perkins, 2008- 0078 La. App. 4th Cir. 6/ 25/ 08), 988 So. 2d 793, 801, writ denied, 2008- 1675 ( La. 3/ 4/ 09), 3 So. 3d 471 ("[ a] trial court may not

revisit a previously denied motion to reconsider [ sentence].").

PMC TMH WIL

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY C E K OF COURT FOR THE COURT

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

Related

State v. Gedric
741 So. 2d 849 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1999)
State v. Neville
655 So. 2d 785 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1995)
Armond v. Armond, 2009-0410 (La. 3/4/09)
3 So. 3d 471 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2009)
State v. Perkins
988 So. 2d 793 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State Of Louisiana v. Cameron Williams, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-louisiana-v-cameron-williams-lactapp-2019.