State v. Lingenfelser

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Lingenfelser

531 So. 2d 280, 1988 La. LEXIS 2446, 1988 WL 102501

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedOctober 3, 1988

DocketNo. 88-KH-2351

StatusPublished

This text of 531 So. 2d 280 (State v. Lingenfelser) 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. Lingenfelser, 531 So. 2d 280, 1988 La. LEXIS 2446, 1988 WL 102501 (La. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Lingenfelser, John H.; — Defendants); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 88KW-1392; Parish of Plaquemines, 25th Judicial District Court, Div. “A”, Nos. 61468, 61469.

The relator represents that the district court has failed to act timely on an application he has filed for post-conviction relief. If relator’s representation is correct, the district court is ordered to consider and act on the application.

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

In re Lingenfelser, John H.; — Defendants); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 88KW-1392; Parish of Plaquemines, 25th Judicial District Court, Div. “A”, Nos. 61468, 61469.

The relator represents that the district court has failed to act timely on an application he has filed for post-conviction relief. If relator’s representation is correct, the district court is ordered to consider and act on the application.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

531 So. 2d 280, 1988 La. LEXIS 2446, 1988 WL 102501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-lingenfelser-la-1988.