State Of Louisiana v. Charles Pineda
This text of State Of Louisiana v. Charles Pineda (State Of Louisiana v. Charles Pineda) 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.
Opinion
STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2019 KW 1184 PAGE 1 OF 2
VERSUS
CHARLES L. PINEDA OCT Z 9 2019
In Re: Charles L. Pineda, applying for supervisory writs,
22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany, No. 562011.
BEFORE: HIGGINBOTHAM, CRAIN, AND LANIER, JJ.
WRIT DENIED. The records of the Clerk of Court of St.
Tammany Parish reflect the district court acted on relator' s
motion on June 24, 2019. Moreover, as an indigent inmate, relator is entitled to receive certain court documents, such as
his guilty plea transcript, the bill of information or
indictment, commitment papers, court minutes for various
portions of the trial, and minutes of his sentencing, free of
charge without the necessity of establishing a particularized
need. See State ex rel. Simmons v. State, 93- 0275 ( La. 12/ 16/ 94), 647 So. 2d 1094 ( per curiam). As to all other
documents, an indigent inmate has the constitutional right to free copies only in those instances in which he shows that denial of the request will deprive him of an adequate
opportunity to present his fairly. that claims Meeting constitutional threshold requires a showing of a particularized need. An inmate therefore cannot make a showing of
particularized need absent a properly filed application for postconviction relief, which sets out specific claims of
constitutional errors requiring the requested documentation for support. See State ex rel. Bernard v. Criminal District Court Section " J", 94-- 2247 ( La. 4/ 28/ 95) , 653 So. 2d 1174 ( per curiam) .
According to relator, he has yet to file an application for postconviction relief; thus, relator failed to establish a
particularized need. Based on the records, the district court
did not err in denying relator' s motion for production of
documents.
Without the showing of a particularized need, relator may need to seek his requested documents under the Public Records Law. However, a writ application in a criminal arising proceeding is not the proper procedural vehicle to establish a
right to records under the Public Records Law, La. R. S. 44: 1, et
seq. A person who wants to examine public records must make the request to the custodian of records. See La. R. S. 44: 31 & 44: 32. If a request for is denied the public records by custodian, before seeking relief from this court, the person must first institute civil proceedings for a writ of mandamus at the district court level. See La. R. S. 44: 35( A). Should the STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
NO. 2019 KW 1184 PACE 2 OF 2
person prevail, he should be prepared to pay the regular service fees for copies of the documents. After the district court
rules in the civil proceeding, the person may seek an appeal of
the district court' s action, if he desires. See La. R. S. 44: 35( C). See also State ex rel. McKnight v. State, 98- 2258 La. App. 1st Cir. 12/ 3/ 98), 742 So. 2d 894, 895 ( per curiam).
Crain, J., concurs.
DEPUTY CL OF COURT FOR THE COURT
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State Of Louisiana v. Charles Pineda, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-louisiana-v-charles-pineda-lactapp-2019.