State v. Lagman

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Lagman

152 So. 3d 164, 2014 WL 6463777

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedNovember 7, 2014

DocketNo. 2013-KP-2946

StatusPublished

This text of 152 So. 3d 164 (State v. Lagman) 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. Lagman, 152 So. 3d 164, 2014 WL 6463777 (La. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Lagman, Jacob R.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 491711; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2013 KW 1516.

Writ granted in part; otherwise denied; case remanded to the district court. The district court is ordered to appoint counsel and conduct a hearing at which it will determine whether relator is entitled to an out-of-time appeal concerning his habitual offender adjudication and sentencing and on the issue of whether he breached the plea agreement. See State v. Counterman, 475 So.2d 336, 340 (La.1985) (out-of-time appeal may be appropriate in cases in which “the defense attorney was at fault in failing to file or perfect a timely appeal.”). [165]*165In all other respects the application is denied.

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

In re Lagman, Jacob R.; — Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. I, No. 491711; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2013 KW 1516.

Writ granted in part; otherwise denied; case remanded to the district court. The district court is ordered to appoint counsel and conduct a hearing at which it will determine whether relator is entitled to an out-of-time appeal concerning his habitual offender adjudication and sentencing and on the issue of whether he breached the plea agreement. See State v. Counterman, 475 So.2d 336, 340 (La.1985) (out-of-time appeal may be appropriate in cases in which “the defense attorney was at fault in failing to file or perfect a timely appeal.”). [165]*165In all other respects the application is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

152 So. 3d 164, 2014 WL 6463777, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-lagman-la-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack