State v. Payne

Louisiana Court of Appeal

State v. Payne

559 So. 2d 982, 1990 La. App. LEXIS 932, 1990 WL 48753

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedApril 11, 1990

DocketNo. 89-KA-783

StatusPublished

This text of 559 So. 2d 982 (State v. Payne) 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. Payne, 559 So. 2d 982, 1990 La. App. LEXIS 932, 1990 WL 48753 (La. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

WICKER, Judge.

Junior T. Payne appeals his jury conviction of the violation of La.R.S. 14:62, simple burglary, and 14:56, simple criminal damage. He asks us to review the record of his conviction for error patent. We affirm the conviction but remand the case to the trial court to amend the commitment to reflect credit for time served.

An error patent review includes the caption, the time and place of holding court, the indictment or information and its endorsement, the arraignment, the plea, the bill of particulars filed in connection with a short form indictment or information, the mentioning of the impaneling of the jury, the minute entry reflecting sequestration, the verdict, and the judgment or sentence. State v. Oliveaux, 312 So.2d 337 (La.1975); State v. Schneider, 542 So.2d 620 (La.App. 5th Cir.1989), writ denied 548 So.2d 1245 (La.1989). The minute entry and transcript reflect the judge’s intention, in accordance with La.C.Cr.P. art. [983]*983880, to give Payne credit for time served. However, the commitment does not reflect credit for time served. We therefore remand the case to the trial court so that the commitment can be amended to conform with the minute entry and transcript.

AFFIRMED BUT REMANDED.

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

WICKER, Judge.

Junior T. Payne appeals his jury conviction of the violation of La.R.S. 14:62, simple burglary, and 14:56, simple criminal damage. He asks us to review the record of his conviction for error patent. We affirm the conviction but remand the case to the trial court to amend the commitment to reflect credit for time served.

An error patent review includes the caption, the time and place of holding court, the indictment or information and its endorsement, the arraignment, the plea, the bill of particulars filed in connection with a short form indictment or information, the mentioning of the impaneling of the jury, the minute entry reflecting sequestration, the verdict, and the judgment or sentence. State v. Oliveaux, 312 So.2d 337 (La.1975); State v. Schneider, 542 So.2d 620 (La.App. 5th Cir.1989), writ denied 548 So.2d 1245 (La.1989). The minute entry and transcript reflect the judge’s intention, in accordance with La.C.Cr.P. art. [983]*983880, to give Payne credit for time served. However, the commitment does not reflect credit for time served. We therefore remand the case to the trial court so that the commitment can be amended to conform with the minute entry and transcript.

AFFIRMED BUT REMANDED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

559 So. 2d 982, 1990 La. App. LEXIS 932, 1990 WL 48753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-payne-lactapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack