State of Louisiana v. Zachariah Lastrapes

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedMay 11, 2016
DocketKW-0015-0865
StatusUnknown

This text of State of Louisiana v. Zachariah Lastrapes (State of Louisiana v. Zachariah Lastrapes) 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. Zachariah Lastrapes, (La. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT P.O. Box 16577 Lake Charles LA 70616 (337) 433-9403

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION Harold D. Register, III Attorney at Law 216 Rue Louis XIV Lafayette LA 70508

REHEARING ACTION: May 11, 2016

Docket Number: 15 00865-KW

STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS ZACHARIAH LASTRAPES

Writ Application from Lafayette Parish Case No. CR 150955

BEFORE JUDGES:

Hon. Sylvia R. Cooks Hon. Billy Howard Ezell Hon. John E. Conery

As counsel of record in the captioned case, you are hereby notified that the ruling for

the application for rehearing filed by Zachariah Lastrapes is:

REHEARING GRANTED: Rehearing in this matter is granted for the limited purpose of deleting from the original ruling: “Pretextual stops are not prohibited. Whren v. U.S., 517 U.S. 806, 116 S.Ct. 1769 (1996); State v. Sherman, 05-779 (La. 4/4/06), 931 So.2d 286.”

For a traffic stop to be justified at its inception, an officer must have an objectively reasonable suspicion that some sort of illegal activity occurred or is about to occur before stopping the vehicle. A traffic stop supported by probable cause does not violate the Fourth Amendment regardless of the officer’s actual motivations. See Florida v. Jardines, __ U.S. __, 133 S.Ct. 1409 (2013); Brendlin v. California, 551 U.S. 249, 127 S.Ct. 2400 (2007); Arkansas v. Sullivan, 532 U.S. 769, 121 S.Ct. 1876 (2001); Parker v. Town of Woodworth, 14-943 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/4/15), 160 So.3d 1113, writ denied, 15-659 (La. 5/22/15), 171 So.3d 254.

The original opinion of this court as amended in this rehearing is affirmed in all respects.

Ezell, J., dissents and would deny the rehearing.

cc: Keith A. Stutes, Counsel for the Applicant Celeste C. White, Counsel for the Applicant

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

Related

Whren v. United States
517 U.S. 806 (Supreme Court, 1996)
Brendlin v. California
551 U.S. 249 (Supreme Court, 2007)
Florida v. Jardines
133 S. Ct. 1409 (Supreme Court, 2013)
State v. Sherman
931 So. 2d 286 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2006)
Arkansas v. Sullivan
532 U.S. 769 (Supreme Court, 2001)
Parker v. Town of Woodworth
160 So. 3d 1113 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2015)
Ballay v. Mall of Louisiana Land Holding, LLC
171 So. 3d 254 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2015)
Day v. Allen
129 So. 260 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State of Louisiana v. Zachariah Lastrapes, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-louisiana-v-zachariah-lastrapes-lactapp-2016.