339 So.2d 8 (La. 1976), 57961, State v. Landry

Docket Nº:57961.
Citation:339 So.2d 8
Party Name:STATE of Louisiana v. John R. LANDRY.
Case Date:November 08, 1976
Court:Supreme Court of Louisiana
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 8

339 So.2d 8 (La. 1976)

STATE of Louisiana

v.

John R. LANDRY.

No. 57961.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

November 8, 1976

Sam J. D'Amico, D'Amico & Curet, Baton Rouge, for defendant-relator.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ossie B. Brown, Dist. Atty., Richard E. Chaffin, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-respondent.

SANDERS, Chief Justice.

The State charged John R. Landry with possession of marijuana with intent to distribute in violation of LSA-R.S. 40:966, subd. A. The defendant filed a motion to suppress the marijuana, alleging an unconstitutional search and seizure. Following the hearing on the motion, the trial judge took the matter under advisement. Later, he sustained the motion to suppress.

The Assistant District Attorney assigned error and requested time to apply to this Court for supervisory relief. The trial judge gave the State until February 13, 1976, to file its application for supervisory writs.

The State did not file a writ application with this Court. Instead, on January 29, 1976, the State filed a motion for rehearing to allow the State to present further evidence. At that time, the trial judge ordered both parties to appear on March 30, 1976, to show cause why the motion for rehearing should not be granted. After argument on the motion, the trial court granted a rehearing. The defendant made timely application to this Court for supervisory writs. The trial court stayed further proceedings pending action by this Court. We granted the defendant's application for writs. La., 332 So.2d 482 (1976).

The issue is whether a trial court, after sustaining a motion to suppress tangible evidence, may grant a rehearing on that motion to allow the State to present more evidence.

The defendant argues that the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide for rehearings after a ruling on a motion to suppress. Moreover, he argues that even if such a procedure is authorized, since the time within which the State was to apply to this Court for writs has expired, the ruling on the motion to suppress is final.

Article 703 of the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure, dealing with the motion to suppress, provides in pertinent part:

'A defendant aggrieved by an unconstitutional search or seizure may move to

Page 9

suppress for use as evidence at the trial on the merits, any tangible objects or other...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP