State v. Broadnax

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Broadnax

421 So. 2d 238, 1982 La. LEXIS 12295

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedOctober 22, 1982

DocketNo. 82-K-1402

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 421 So. 2d 238 (State v. Broadnax) 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.

Bluebook

State v. Broadnax, 421 So. 2d 238, 1982 La. LEXIS 12295 (La. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was charged in two bills of information with possession of pentazocine with intent to distribute in violation of La. R.S. 40:967. A second count in one of the informations also charged him as a convicted felon with possession of a firearm, La. R.S. 14:95.1. On May 25, 1982, the trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence in both cases, and the state sought review of those rulings in this Court. We granted the state’s application for supervisory writs, 416 So.2d 936 (La.1982), and set the case for oral argument. However, proof of defendant’s death has been filed in this Court. The prosecution is therefore abated against defendant. State v. Clayton and Isom, - So.2d - (La.1982), Nos. 82-KA-0730, 81-KA-1514; State v. Hamilton, 370 So.2d 874 (La.1979); State v. Ferina, 351 So.2d 1200 (La.1977); State v. Morris, 328 So.2d 65 (La.1976).

Accordingly, we.withdraw the grant of the state’s writ application and remand this case to the trial court with instructions to dismiss the bills of information.

WRIT GRANT VACATED; CASE REMANDED.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was charged in two bills of information with possession of pentazocine with intent to distribute in violation of La. R.S. 40:967. A second count in one of the informations also charged him as a convicted felon with possession of a firearm, La. R.S. 14:95.1. On May 25, 1982, the trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence in both cases, and the state sought review of those rulings in this Court. We granted the state’s application for supervisory writs, 416 So.2d 936 (La.1982), and set the case for oral argument. However, proof of defendant’s death has been filed in this Court. The prosecution is therefore abated against defendant. State v. Clayton and Isom, - So.2d - (La.1982), Nos. 82-KA-0730, 81-KA-1514; State v. Hamilton, 370 So.2d 874 (La.1979); State v. Ferina, 351 So.2d 1200 (La.1977); State v. Morris, 328 So.2d 65 (La.1976).

Accordingly, we.withdraw the grant of the state’s writ application and remand this case to the trial court with instructions to dismiss the bills of information.

WRIT GRANT VACATED; CASE REMANDED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

421 So. 2d 238, 1982 La. LEXIS 12295, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-broadnax-la-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack