State v. Peters

76 So. 703, 142 La. 250, 1917 La. LEXIS 1661
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Peters. Read the opinion of the Court — 142 La. 249
Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided October 29, 1917·No. No. 22804·Published

Opinion

PROVO STY, J.

The learned counsel for accused admits that the punishment imposed in this case is not sufficient to bring the case within the jurisdiction of this court, but he contends that the sentence in the other case at this time before the court against the same accused (No. 22,805, 76 South. 7021) 0n a like charge is sufficient for jurisdiction, and that the two cases ought to be taken together. The other case is in no way involved in the present one; hence the sentence in it cannot serve as a basis for jurisdiction in the present one.

Appeal dismissed.

See dissenting opinion of O’NIELL, J., 76 South. 703.

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

State v. Peters, 76 So. 703, 142 La. 250, 1917 La. LEXIS 1661 (La. 1917).

76 So. 703 (State v. Peters) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zagame v. Chalmette Laundry Co.
76 So. 703 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1917)