State v. Singleton

215 So. 2d 512, 252 La. 976, 1968 La. LEXIS 2571
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedNovember 12, 1968
DocketNo. 49156
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 215 So. 2d 512 (State v. Singleton) 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. Singleton, 215 So. 2d 512, 252 La. 976, 1968 La. LEXIS 2571 (La. 1968).

Opinion

HAMLIN, Justice:

Defendant was charged by bill of information with the crime of attempted murder, tried, convicted, and sentenced to serve fifteen years at hard labor in the State Penitentiary. He appeals to this Court from his conviction and sentence, presenting for our consideration one bill of exceptions reserved to the overruling of a motion for a new trial.

Counsel for defendant neither filed a brief in this Court nor made an appearance on the date set for argument.

The motion for a new trial avers that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the law and the evidence. The bill of exceptions reserved to the overruling of the motion by the trial judge avers that the ruling was contrary to the law and evidence submitted in the matter.

Our review in criminal cases is limited in scope to questions of law. Art. VII, Sec. 10, La.Const. of 1921; State v. Latigue, 251 La. 193, 203 So.2d 546; State v. Page, 251 La. 810, 206 So.2d 503. The allegation that the verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence ordinarily presents nothing for our review. State v. Stokes, 250 La. 277, 195 So.2d 267; State v. Pebworth, 251 La. 1063, 208 So.2d 530. Cf. Art. 851 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Out of an abundance of caution, we have examined the record for errors patent on its face and find that none exist. There is some evidence of the essential elements of the crime charged; therefore, this Court will not review the sufficiency of the evidence. State v. Laviolette, 250 La. 287, 195 So.2d 270; State v. Latigue, supra.

The bill of exceptions is without merit.

For the reasons assigned, the conviction and sentence are affirmed.

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

Related

State v. Occhipinti
358 So. 2d 1209 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1978)
State v. Skelton
340 So. 2d 256 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1976)
State v. Sharp
338 So. 2d 654 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1976)
State v. Carney
319 So. 2d 400 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1975)
State v. Landrum
307 So. 2d 345 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1975)
State v. Michelli
301 So. 2d 577 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1974)
State v. Gilbert
286 So. 2d 345 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1973)
State v. Plummer
281 So. 2d 716 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1973)
State v. Seals
233 So. 2d 914 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1970)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
215 So. 2d 512, 252 La. 976, 1968 La. LEXIS 2571, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-singleton-la-1968.