State v. Hudson

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Hudson

431 So. 2d 1050, 1982 La. LEXIS 12563

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided November 19, 1982·No. No. 82-K-2534·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Transferred. In this writ application, the relator seeks review of the revocation of his probation. He does not seek to reverse or modify his conviction or sentence. Hence, this is not a writ application relating to a conviction or a sentence, and does not constitute a matter over which this Court has exclusive jurisdiction. It was properly filed originally in the court of appeal. La.Const. 1974, Art. 5 § 5(E). See State v. James Williams, 418 So.2d 1351.

DIXON, C.J., and CALOGERO, J., dissent from the order transferring this application. The only thing this application does “relate to” is the sentence, to determine whether it shall be made executory, and this Court has exclusive jurisdiction.

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

Transferred. In this writ application, the relator seeks review of the revocation of his probation. He does not seek to reverse or modify his conviction or sentence. Hence, this is not a writ application relating to a conviction or a sentence, and does not constitute a matter over which this Court has exclusive jurisdiction. It was properly filed originally in the court of appeal. La.Const. 1974, Art. 5 § 5(E). See State v. James Williams, 418 So.2d 1351.

DIXON, C.J., and CALOGERO, J., dissent from the order transferring this application. The only thing this application does “relate to” is the sentence, to determine whether it shall be made executory, and this Court has exclusive jurisdiction.

State v. Hudson, 431 So. 2d 1050, 1982 La. LEXIS 12563 (La. 1982).

Pincite

431 So. 2d 1050 (State v. Hudson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related