State v. Russell

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

State v. Russell

447 A.2d 1139, 1982 R.I. LEXIS 1114

CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island

DecidedMarch 12, 1982

DocketNo. 82-3-M.P.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 447 A.2d 1139 (State v. Russell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Russell, 447 A.2d 1139, 1982 R.I. LEXIS 1114 (R.I. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

This petition for certiorari seeks review of a District Court order which precluded defendant from appealing her conviction on a charge of loitering for indecent purposes to the Superior Court. In accordance with our recent determination in two similar matters, to wit, State v. Lawrence, R.I., 424 A.2d 242 and State v. Roy, R.I., 431 A.2d 436, we conclude that the instant case is controlled by our holding in State v. Vinagro, R.I., 433 A.2d 945 (1981).

Therefore, the petition for writ of certio-rari is granted, the District Court order denying defendant’s appeal is vacated, and the matter is remanded to the District Court in order that defendant may have the opportunity to perfect her right to a de novo appeal in the Superior Court. Defendant shall perfect said appeal within 10 days of the date this order is filed.

Entered as an order of this court this 12th day of March, 1982.

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

ORDER

This petition for certiorari seeks review of a District Court order which precluded defendant from appealing her conviction on a charge of loitering for indecent purposes to the Superior Court. In accordance with our recent determination in two similar matters, to wit, State v. Lawrence, R.I., 424 A.2d 242 and State v. Roy, R.I., 431 A.2d 436, we conclude that the instant case is controlled by our holding in State v. Vinagro, R.I., 433 A.2d 945 (1981).

Therefore, the petition for writ of certio-rari is granted, the District Court order denying defendant’s appeal is vacated, and the matter is remanded to the District Court in order that defendant may have the opportunity to perfect her right to a de novo appeal in the Superior Court. Defendant shall perfect said appeal within 10 days of the date this order is filed.

Entered as an order of this court this 12th day of March, 1982.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

447 A.2d 1139, 1982 R.I. LEXIS 1114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-russell-ri-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack