State v. Flucas, 51739
| Court | Supreme Court of Louisiana |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 264 So.2d 586,262 La. 625 |
| Parties | STATE of Louisiana v. Nelson FLUCAS. |
| Docket Number | No. 51739,51739 |
| Decision Date | 15 June 1972 |
Page 586
v.
Nelson FLUCAS.
Rehearing Denied July 31, 1972.
[262 La. 626] Paul Henry Kidd, Robert P. McLeod, Monroe, George M. Strickler, Jr., New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.
William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Harry H. Howard, Asst. Atty. Gen., Hal R. Henderson, Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The defendant, Nelson Flucas, appeals his jury conviction of aggravated criminal [262 La. 627] damage to property, La.R.S. 14:55 for which he was sentenced to serve six years and 140 days in the State Penitentiary.* In undertaking this appeal, the defendant relies upon seven bills of exceptions reserved and perfected during his trial.
Bills of exceptions Nos. 1 and 2 concern a motion to quash the petit jury venire and a motion for a change of venue. The issues raised by these two bills are identical to those presented and decided in State v. Curry, 262 La. 280, 263 So.2d 36 (decided May 18, 1972). For the reasons set forth in that decision, we find these two bills of exceptions lack merit.
Bills of exceptions Nos. 3 and 4 concern a motion attacking the constitutionality of State Statute, La.C.Cr.P. Art. 627 and a
Page 587
motion for the production and inspection of Grand Jury minutes. The issues raised by these two bills are identical to those presented and decided in State v. Curry, 262 La. 280, 264 So.2d 583 (decided this date). For the reasons set forth in that decision, we find these two bills of exceptions lack merit.Bill of exceptions No. 5 alleging the trial judge committed error when he disqualified two black persons as prospective jurors for the reason they were unable to read and write the English language. This bill of exceptions raises idential issues to [262 La. 628] those presented and decided in State v. McDaniel, 262 La. 629, 264 So.2d (decided this date). For the reasons set forth in that decision, we find these two bills of exceptions lack merit.
Bills of exceptions No. 6 and 7 were reserved when the trial judge refused to accept defense counsel's challenge for cause of two prospective jurors. One prospective juror was challenged because of his friendship toward the prosecuting attorney, and the second prospective juror was challenged because of his friendship with one of the testifying police authorities, and because the prosecuting attorney had done some legal work for him approximately one month prior...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Richmond, 53407
...of the discretion granted the trial court in determining whether the relationship would influence the juror's verdict. State v. Flucas, 262 La. 625, 264 So.2d 586 (1972); State v. Square, supra; State v. Reese, 250 La. 151, 194 So.2d 729, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 996, 88 S.Ct. 485, 19 L.Ed.2d......
-
State v. Calloway, 58280
...State v. Weathers, La., 320 So.2d 895 (1975); State v. Jones, supra; State v. Richmond, La., 284 So.2d 317 (1973); State v. Flucas, 262 La. 625, 264 So.2d 586 (1972); State v. Isaac, 261 La. 487, 260 So.2d 302 Assignment of Error No. 5 is without merit. ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NO. 7 In Assignme......
-
State v. Clark, 57438
...State v. Weathers, La., 320 So.2d 895 (1975); State v. Jones, La., 315 So.2d 650 (1975); State v. Richmond, supra; State v. Flucas, 262 La. 625, 264 So.2d 586 (1972); State v. Isaac, 261 La. 487, 260 So.2d 302 ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NO. 6 The defendant complains that the notice of the State's ......
-
State v. Frazier, 53447
...to take the stand. The determination of the qualifications of a juror are within the sound discretion of the trial judge. State v. Flucas, 262 La. 625, 264 So.2d 586 (1972); State v. Rogers, 241 La. 841, 132 So.2d 819 (1961); State v. Brazile, 229 La. 600, 86 So.2d 208 (1956). Thus, the que......