State of Louisiana v. William Andrew Barnett, III

Opinion

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

15-890

VERSUS

WILLIAM ANDREW BARNETT, III

************ APPEAL FROM THE FOURTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF CALCASIEU, DOCKET NO. 6589-12 HONORABLE CLAYTON DAVIS, DISTRICT JUDGE

************ SYLVIA R. COOKS JUDGE ************

Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, Billy H. Ezell, and John E. Conery, Judges.

APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANT-APPEALLANT IS PERMITTED TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN THIRTY DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS DECISION.

CHRISTY MAY ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY - 14th Judicial District 901 LAKESHORE DR., STE. 600 LAKE CHARLES, LA 70601 (337) 437-3400 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: State of Louisiana

EDWARD J. MARQUET LA APPELLATE PROJECT P.O. BOX 53733 LAFAYETTE, LA 70505-3733 (337) 237-6841 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT: William Andrew Barnett, III Cooks, Judge. On February 22, 2012, Defendant-Appellant, William Andrew Barnett, III,

was charged by bill of information with possession of CDS I with intent to

distribute, a violation of La.R.S. 40:966(A)(1); possession of CDS II, a violation of

La.R.S. 40:967(C); and illegal use of currency, a violation of La.R.S. 40:1041. On

September 24, 2012, pursuant to a plea agreement, Defendant-Appellant entered a

plea of guilty to the charge of possession of CDS I with intent to distribute and to

the charge of possession of CDS II. The illegal use of currency charge was

dismissed. As a result, Defendant-Appellant was sentenced to five years on each

count, to run consecutively. The sentences were suspended, and Defendant-

Appellant was placed on supervised probation for a term of five years. Defendant-

Appellant was also ordered to pay a $500 fine, court costs, and fees. Other special

conditions also applied.

On January 21, 2015, Defendant-Appellant admitted that he violated the

conditions of his probation and he was ordered to serve one year at Cedarwood and

continue the five-year supervised probation term previously ordered. Upon

completion of Defendant-Appellant’s one-year sentence served at Cedarwood, his

probation was to be terminated.

Defendant-Appellant filed a “Motion and Order for Appeal” with the trial

court on May 5, 2015. The trial court granted Defendant-Appellant’s motion on

July 1, 2015.

On September 18, 2015, this court lodged the appeal record for this case.

On November 23, 2015, this court issued a rule to show cause why this matter

should not be dismissed as the judgment at issue is a probation revocation. State

ex rel. Clavell v. State, 02-1244 (La. 12/12/03), 861 So.2d 186. On December 1, 2015, Defendant-Appellant responded, acknowledging that

the judgment is non-appealable and requests that the “current appeal be dismissed,

and the appellant be permitted to file an application for supervisory writs within

thirty (30) days from the date of this decision.”

The appeal is dismissed, as the judgment at issue is a probation revocation

and thus not appealable. Clavell, 861 So.2d 186. Defendant-Appellant is hereby

permitted to file a proper application for supervisory writs, in compliance with

Uniform Rules—Courts of Appeal, Rule 4, no later than thirty days from the date

of this decision. Defendant is not required to file a notice of intent to seek writs

nor obtain an order setting a return date pursuant to Uniform Rules—Courts of

Appeal, Rule 4-3, as we hereby construe the motion for appeal as a timely-filed

notice of intent to seek a supervisory writ.

APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT IS PERMITTED TO

FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN

THIRTY DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS DECISION.