State v. White
| Decision Date | 26 March 1945 |
| Docket Number | 37723. |
| Citation | 21 So.2d 877,207 La. 695 |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. WHITE. |
Appeal from Eleventh Judicial District Court, Parish of DeSoto; Wm. H. Ponder, Judge.
Fred S. LeBlanc, Atty. Gen., M. E. Culligan, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Edwin M. Fraser, Dist. Atty., of Many, for the State plaintiff and appellant.
Cawthorn & Golsan, of Mansfield, for defendant and appellee.
Pompey White the defendant, was indicted on October 10, 1944, for murder. Upon trial, he was convicted of negligent homicide. On the motion of the defendant, a new trial was granted on ground that the verdict was contrary to the law and the evidence. The State excepted to the order granting the new trial and has appealed.
It appears from the per curiam of the trial judge that the new trial was granted under the provisions of Article 509 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the reason that the evidence did not support the verdict.
The State contends that the trial court erred in granting the new trial because the verdict of negligent homicide was responsive to the charge of murder. Counsel for the State takes the position that the State has a right to have the ruling of the trial judge, granting the new trial, reviewed on appeal by this Court under the provisions of Articles 540 and 541 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Articles 540 and 541 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read as follows:
Article 540 Code Cr.Proc.
'A case is finally disposed of by any judgment which dismisses the prosecution, whether before or after verdict, that grants or refuses to grant a new trial, that arrests or refuses to arrest judgment, or that imposes sentence.' Article 541 Code Cr.Proc.
From a careful analysis of these articles of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is apparent that the law makers intended to grant an appeal only from rulings or judgments which finally dispose of the case. The granting of the new trial does not dispose of the case.
Moreover, under the provisions of Article 7, sec. 10, of the Constitution and Article 516 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, neither the appellate nor supervisory jurisdiction of this Court can be invoked to review the granting or the refusing to grant a new trial except for error of law.
It is well settled in the jurisprudence of this State...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Clement, No. KA 07-650 (La. App. 2/6/2008)
...343 So.2d 1026, 1037 (La.1977)(same); State v. D'Ingianni, 217 La. 945, 951, 47 So.2d 731, 733 (1950)(same); cf. State v. White, 207 La. 695, 698, 21 So.2d 877, 878 (1945)("The granting of a new trial on . . . grounds [that the verdict is contrary to the law and evidence] does not present a......
-
State v. Macon
... ... FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ... On January 16, 2002, Avilla Kern reported that her blue 1996 Chevrolet Lumina had been stolen. On March 17, 2003, two officers from the New Orleans Police Department stopped a white 1996 Lumina after the vehicle ran a stop sign. The license plate was not visible at the rear of the Lumina. As the officers activated their sirens and lights, the car sped away and, after driving onto the curb, the driver exited the vehicle and fled on foot. Following a foot chase, the officers ... ...
-
State v. Danek
...Commonwealth v. Jones, 370 Pa.Super. 591, 537 A.2d 32 (1988); see also State v. Lynn, 120 S.C. 258, 113 S.E. 74 (1922); State v. White, 207 La. 695, 21 So.2d 877 (1945); State v. Lindsey, 302 N.W.2d 98 (Iowa This Court has interpreted Chavez I to require a two-step analysis of a state's app......
-
State v. Miller
... ... State v. Toomer, 395 So.2d 1320, 1328 (La.1981)(grant or denial of a new trial under art. 851(5) "presents nothing for this Court's appellate review"); State v. Williams, 343 So.2d 1026, 1037 (La.1977)(same); State v. D'Ingianni, 217 La. 945, 951, 47 So.2d 731, 733 (1950)(same); cf. State v. White, 207 La. 695, 698, 21 So.2d 877, 878 (1945)("The granting of a new trial on ... grounds [that the verdict is contrary to the law and evidence] does not present any question of law."). Even assuming, arguendo, that the trial court erred with respect to its finding that the state's suppression of ... ...