State v. CIRTAIN

Louisiana Court of Appeal

State v. CIRTAIN

40 So. 3d 494, 10 La.App. 3 Cir. 140, 2010 La. App. LEXIS 844, 2010 WL 2178930

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedJune 2, 2010

Docket10-140

StatusPublished

This text of 40 So. 3d 494 (State v. CIRTAIN) 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. CIRTAIN, 40 So. 3d 494, 10 La.App. 3 Cir. 140, 2010 La. App. LEXIS 844, 2010 WL 2178930 (La. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

AMY, J.

On September 17, 2009, after a bench trial, the trial court convicted the Defendant, Barry Cirtain, of second offense driving while intoxicated, a violation of La.R.S. 14:98, and simple obstruction of a highway, a violation of La.R.S. 14:97. The trial court then sentenced the Defendant on November 30, 2009, to six months in the parish jail, with all but 48 hours suspended, to be served without benefit of probation, parole or suspension of sentence. Defendant filed a Motion for Appeal on December 4, 2009, and the trial court granted that appeal. Thereafter, this court issued a rule to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as not ap-pealable. In response, the Defendant filed a motion in this court acknowledging that he was not entitled to an appeal and requesting that this court convert his improperly filed appeal to a writ application.

The judgment at issue is not appealable. La.Code Crim.P. art. 912.1. That being the case, we hereby dismiss the Defendant’s appeal. However, the Defendant may seek supervisory writs within thirty days of the date of this decision. The Defendant is not required to file a notice of intent to seek writs nor obtain an order *495 from the trial court setting a return date as is generally required by Uniform Rules — Courts of Appeal, Rule 4-3. We construe the motion for appeal as a timely filed notice of intent to seek a supervisory writ.

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

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

AMY, J.

On September 17, 2009, after a bench trial, the trial court convicted the Defendant, Barry Cirtain, of second offense driving while intoxicated, a violation of La.R.S. 14:98, and simple obstruction of a highway, a violation of La.R.S. 14:97. The trial court then sentenced the Defendant on November 30, 2009, to six months in the parish jail, with all but 48 hours suspended, to be served without benefit of probation, parole or suspension of sentence. Defendant filed a Motion for Appeal on December 4, 2009, and the trial court granted that appeal. Thereafter, this court issued a rule to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as not ap-pealable. In response, the Defendant filed a motion in this court acknowledging that he was not entitled to an appeal and requesting that this court convert his improperly filed appeal to a writ application.

The judgment at issue is not appealable. La.Code Crim.P. art. 912.1. That being the case, we hereby dismiss the Defendant’s appeal. However, the Defendant may seek supervisory writs within thirty days of the date of this decision. The Defendant is not required to file a notice of intent to seek writs nor obtain an order *495 from the trial court setting a return date as is generally required by Uniform Rules — Courts of Appeal, Rule 4-3. We construe the motion for appeal as a timely filed notice of intent to seek a supervisory writ.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 So. 3d 494, 10 La.App. 3 Cir. 140, 2010 La. App. LEXIS 844, 2010 WL 2178930, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cirtain-lactapp-2010.