State v. Foster

675 So. 2d 1101, 1996 La. LEXIS 1902, 1996 WL 366005
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedJune 28, 1996
DocketNo. 96-K-0670
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 675 So. 2d 1101 (State v. Foster) 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. Foster, 675 So. 2d 1101, 1996 La. LEXIS 1902, 1996 WL 366005 (La. 1996).

Opinion

In re Foster, Herbert; — Defendant(s); applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, [1102]*1102Div. “J” No. 343-037; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 95KA-0585.

Granted in part; denied in part. The single attempt at domiciliary service upon relator by leaving the subpoena with an unidentified Ms. Lewis, who indicated that she did not see relator often at that address and refused to sign the return, did not establish that relator had actual notice of the proceedings and did not discharge the state’s heavy burden “to exercise due diligence in discovering the whereabouts of the defendant as well as in taking appropriate steps to secure his presence for trial once it has found him.” State v. Estill, 614 So.2d 709, 710 (La.1993). This case is remanded to the district court for purposes of reopening the hearing on relator’s motion to quash. The state may present evidence of what additional steps, if any, it took to execute the capias issued after relator’s failure to appear in court and thereby secure his presence at trial. Cf., City of Baton Rouge v. Wheat, 377 So.2d 1234 (La.1970). Relator may also present evidence on the question of whether he absented himself from his usual abode or had actual notice of the arraignment for which he failed to appear. La.C.Cr.P. art. 579 A(1) and (3). The district court is to rule anew on the basis of the expanded record. Relator may appeal from an adverse ruling. In all other respects, the application is denied.

LEMMON and BLEICH, JJ., would deny the writ. JOHNSON, J., not on panel.

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

Related

State v. Brown
193 So. 3d 267 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016)
State v. Thomas
138 So. 3d 92 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2014)
State v. Paul
126 So. 3d 519 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2012)
State v. Dillon
72 So. 3d 473 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2011)
State v. Sorden
45 So. 3d 181 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2010)
State v. Baptiste
995 So. 2d 1242 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2008)
State v. Patterson
737 So. 2d 222 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
675 So. 2d 1101, 1996 La. LEXIS 1902, 1996 WL 366005, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-foster-la-1996.