State v. Drumgoole

Louisiana Court of Appeal

State v. Drumgoole

538 So. 2d 1014, 1988 WL 149126

Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided April 7, 1988·No. No. K88-369·Published

Opinion

WRIT DENIED: Relator’s allegation that the prosecution made an improper reference, in his closing argument, to the fact that relator failed to testify in his own behalf is prematurely raised in this court since it was not urged by relator in his application to the district court. This court finds that the prosecution sufficiently proved by competent evidence the allegations charging relator as a habitual offender and that the trial judge did not err in finding the relator guilty of being a habitual offender. State v. Evans, 506 So.2d 1283 (La.App. 2 Cir.1987).

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

WRIT DENIED: Relator’s allegation that the prosecution made an improper reference, in his closing argument, to the fact that relator failed to testify in his own behalf is prematurely raised in this court since it was not urged by relator in his application to the district court. This court finds that the prosecution sufficiently proved by competent evidence the allegations charging relator as a habitual offender and that the trial judge did not err in finding the relator guilty of being a habitual offender. State v. Evans, 506 So.2d 1283 (La.App. 2 Cir.1987).

State v. Drumgoole, 538 So. 2d 1014, 1988 WL 149126 (La. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

538 So. 2d 1014 (State v. Drumgoole) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related