State v. Bullock

Louisiana Court of Appeal

State v. Bullock

465 So. 2d 3, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 9829

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 7, 1984

DocketNo. CR83-906

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 465 So. 2d 3 (State v. Bullock) 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 v. Bullock, 465 So. 2d 3, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 9829 (La. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinions

LABORDE, Judge.

Defendant, James Lee Bullock, was indicted by a grand jury for having committed first degree murder in violation of LSA-R.S. 14:30. He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, was tried before a twelve member jury and found guilty of second degree murder, in violation of LSA-R.S. 14:30.1. He was sentenced to life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of pardon or parole for 40 years. Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence from an out-of-time appeal granted by us on August 5, 1983. After reviewing the record and finding no patent errors, we affirm.

LSA-C.Cr.P. 844: PROPER FILING OF ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

Defendant was granted an out-of-time appeal. Pursuant to LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 844, defendant had until five days before the return date to properly file his assignment of errors with the trial court. Although defendant filed a brief in this matter with four assignments of error, he did not file any assignments of error as required by LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 844.¹ Therefore, we are [4]*4limited to a review of the record for errors that are discoverable by a mere inspection of the pleadings. LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 920(2); State v. Thibodeaux, 448 So.2d 879 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1984); State v. Gadison, 441 So.2d 831 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1983).

After conducting a careful examination of the record before us pursuant to LSA-C. Cr.P. art. 920(2), we find no patent errors worthy of reversal.

For these reasons, the defendant’s conviction and sentence are affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

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

LABORDE, Judge.

Defendant, James Lee Bullock, was indicted by a grand jury for having committed first degree murder in violation of LSA-R.S. 14:30. He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, was tried before a twelve member jury and found guilty of second degree murder, in violation of LSA-R.S. 14:30.1. He was sentenced to life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of pardon or parole for 40 years. Defendant appeals his conviction and sentence from an out-of-time appeal granted by us on August 5, 1983. After reviewing the record and finding no patent errors, we affirm.

LSA-C.Cr.P. 844: PROPER FILING OF ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR

Defendant was granted an out-of-time appeal. Pursuant to LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 844, defendant had until five days before the return date to properly file his assignment of errors with the trial court. Although defendant filed a brief in this matter with four assignments of error, he did not file any assignments of error as required by LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 844.¹ Therefore, we are [4]*4limited to a review of the record for errors that are discoverable by a mere inspection of the pleadings. LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 920(2); State v. Thibodeaux, 448 So.2d 879 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1984); State v. Gadison, 441 So.2d 831 (La.App. 3rd Cir.1983).

After conducting a careful examination of the record before us pursuant to LSA-C. Cr.P. art. 920(2), we find no patent errors worthy of reversal.

For these reasons, the defendant’s conviction and sentence are affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

465 So. 2d 3, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 9829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bullock-lactapp-1984.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack