State v. Robinson
This text of 210 So. 3d 797 (State v. Robinson) 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.
Opinion
additionally concurs and assigns reasons:
hi agree with the Court’s order that the motion for leave to file an amicus curiae [798]*798brief should be denied, as it is not in compliance with Louisiana Supreme Court Rule VII, § 12. Specifically, there is no pending application before this Court involving this defendant’s proceedings, and therefore, no legal recourse we can take in response to counsel’s allegations. Moreover, I write separately to note that the brief is submitted by a lawyer, an officer of the court, who is bound by the Louisiana Rules of Professional Conduct. In my view, the filing skirts perilously close to a violation of Rule 3.5(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct, which prohibits conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal. Furthermore, counsel’s “amicus curiae” brief clearly does not comport with this Court’s unequivocal rule regarding amicus briefs, and as a result, in my view, could be considered a frivolous filing, which is prohibited by Rule 3.1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
210 So. 3d 797, 2017 WL 542016, 2017 La. LEXIS 357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-robinson-la-2017.