State v. Smith

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Smith

620 So. 2d 826, 1993 La. LEXIS 2072, 1993 WL 228382

Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided June 25, 1993·No. No. 93-OK-1542·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In re Smith, Odis; — Defendants); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 0118; Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court, Div. “B’’, No. 195236.

Granted. Judgment of the court of appeal denying relator’s motion to withdraw is vacated and set aside. The proper procedure for determining whether an attorney on appeal is entitled to withdraw is set forth in State v. Benjamin, 573 So.2d 528 (La.App. 4th Cir.1990). Accordingly, the case is remanded to the court of appeal to decide relator’s motion to withdraw under the Benjamin standards, without any additional requirements on counsel.

HALL, J., not on panel.

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

In re Smith, Odis; — Defendants); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writs; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 0118; Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court, Div. “B’’, No. 195236.

Granted. Judgment of the court of appeal denying relator’s motion to withdraw is vacated and set aside. The proper procedure for determining whether an attorney on appeal is entitled to withdraw is set forth in State v. Benjamin, 573 So.2d 528 (La.App. 4th Cir.1990). Accordingly, the case is remanded to the court of appeal to decide relator’s motion to withdraw under the Benjamin standards, without any additional requirements on counsel.

HALL, J., not on panel.

State v. Smith, 620 So. 2d 826, 1993 La. LEXIS 2072, 1993 WL 228382 (La. 1993).

Pincite

620 So. 2d 826 (State v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related