State v. Leopaul

Louisiana Court of Appeal

State v. Leopaul

698 So. 2d 9, 97 La.App. 3 Cir. 00563, 1997 La. App. LEXIS 2007, 1997 WL 352906

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedJune 17, 1997

DocketNo. 97 00563

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 698 So. 2d 9 (State v. Leopaul) 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. Leopaul, 698 So. 2d 9, 97 La.App. 3 Cir. 00563, 1997 La. App. LEXIS 2007, 1997 WL 352906 (La. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

WRIT DENIED: There is no error in the trial court’s ruling. See State ex rel. Simmons v. State, 93-0275, 94-2630, 94-2879 (La. 12/16/94); 647 So.2d 1094. In denying Relator’s application, we apply the principles set forth in State ex rel. Bernard v. Criminal District Court, 94-2247 (La. 4/28/95); 653 So.2d 1174 and La.Code Crim.P. art. 914.1. A showing of a particularized need to obtain documents free of charge requires a defendant to show that a denial of his requested documents will deprive him of an “adequate opportunity to present [his] claims fairly.” State ex rel. Bernard v. Criminal District Court, 653 So.2d at 1175 and cases cited therein. To meet this initial requirement, Relator must set forth the claims he intends to raise in his writ of review and show the requested documentation is necessary for a full and adequate review of the assigned errors. Relator has failed to make this initial showing. For this reason, we deny his application.

COOKS, J., dissents.

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

WRIT DENIED: There is no error in the trial court’s ruling. See State ex rel. Simmons v. State, 93-0275, 94-2630, 94-2879 (La. 12/16/94); 647 So.2d 1094. In denying Relator’s application, we apply the principles set forth in State ex rel. Bernard v. Criminal District Court, 94-2247 (La. 4/28/95); 653 So.2d 1174 and La.Code Crim.P. art. 914.1. A showing of a particularized need to obtain documents free of charge requires a defendant to show that a denial of his requested documents will deprive him of an “adequate opportunity to present [his] claims fairly.” State ex rel. Bernard v. Criminal District Court, 653 So.2d at 1175 and cases cited therein. To meet this initial requirement, Relator must set forth the claims he intends to raise in his writ of review and show the requested documentation is necessary for a full and adequate review of the assigned errors. Relator has failed to make this initial showing. For this reason, we deny his application.

COOKS, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

698 So. 2d 9, 97 La.App. 3 Cir. 00563, 1997 La. App. LEXIS 2007, 1997 WL 352906, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-leopaul-lactapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack