Duncan v. LeBlanc, No. 2009 CA 2076 (La. App. 5/7/2010)

• Decision Date: 07 May 2010
• Docket Number: No. 2009 CA 2076.,2009 CA 2076.
• Parties: DERRICK DUNCAN v. JAMES LeBLANC, SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION & RISK REVIEW PANEL.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US

Page 1

DERRICK DUNCAN v. JAMES LeBLANC, SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION & RISK REVIEW PANEL.

No. 2009 CA 2076.

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, First Circuit.

May 7, 2010.

APPEALED FROM THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE DOCKET NUMBER 565,059, DIVISION E, SECTION "23", THE HONORABLE WILLIAM A. MORVANT, JUDGE.

DERRICK DUNCAN, Angola, Louisiana, In Proper Person, Plaintiff/Appellant.

WILLIAM KLINE, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Attorney for Defendant/Appellee, Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections.

Before: PARRO, KUHN, and McDONALD, JJ.

Page 2

Not Designated for Publication

McDONALD, J.

This is an appeal of a judgment from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court, dismissing the plaintiffs petition with prejudice, at his cost. Plaintiff filed a petition for writ of mandamus alleging violations of the law and United States Constitution in connection with the Department of Public Safety and Corrections' handling of his application for a hearing before the Louisiana Risk Review Panel. A Commissioner's Report was issued, recommending dismissal based on the exception of no cause of action, which was raised by the court on its own motion. After careful de novo review of the record by the district court judge, judgment was rendered on August 4, 2009, dismissing the matter and adopting as reasons the Commissioner's Report.

The propriety of a writ of mandamus issuing based on the violation of La. R.S. 15:308 and La. R.S. 15:574.22 has previously been considered by this court and we found that it is not legally permissible. See Weaver v. LeBlanc, 09-0244 (La. App. 1^st Cir. 9/14/09), 22 So.3d 1014. Also, the supreme court has examined the statutes at issue and dictated the respective positions and responsibilities of the executive and judicial branches of government. See State v. Dick, 06-2223, 06-2226 (La. 1/26/07), 951 So.2d 124.

After review of the law and the record in this matter, we find no error in the action of the district court. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed, and this opinion is issued in compliance with Louisiana Uniform Rules, Courts of Appeal, Rule 2-16.1.B. Costs are assessed to Derrick Duncan.

AFFIRMED.