State v. Truelove
188 So. 2d 607, 249 La. 619, 1966 La. LEXIS 2090
Opinion
In re: Robert L. Truelove and Fred H. Truelove applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.
Writs refused. There are no perfected bills of exceptions. See LSA-R.S. 15:499; State v. Foret, 245 La. 70, 156 So.2d 606; State v. Green, 245 La. 1081, 162 So.2d 573; State v. Spivey, 247 La. 719, 174 So.2d 132; State v. Bradford, 247 La. 720, 174 So.2d 132; State v. Polland, 247 La. 721, 174 So. 2d 132; State v. Amos, 247 La. 721, 174 So. 2d 132. Moreover, there is no error patent on the face of the recdrd.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Truelove, 188 So. 2d 607, 249 La. 619, 1966 La. LEXIS 2090 (La. 1966).
188 So. 2d 607 (State v. Truelove) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Green
162 So. 2d 573 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1964)
State v. Foret
156 So. 2d 606 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1963)
State v. Spivey
174 So. 2d 132 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1965)
State v. Bradford
174 So. 2d 132 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1965)
State v. Polland
174 So. 2d 132 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1965)
State v. Amos
174 So. 2d 132 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1965)