State Of Louisiana v. Bryant Scott Tanner

Supreme Court of Louisiana
May 23, 2021
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
BRYANT SCOTT TANNER
No. 2021-KK-00698
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: Bryant Scott Tanner - Applicant Defendant; Applying For Supervisory Writ,
Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Number(s) 3558-F-2019, Court
of Appeal, First Circuit, Number(s) 2021 KW 0531;
_ _ _ _ _ _
May 23, 2021
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
Crain, J., concurs.
JTG
JLW
JDH
SJC
WJC
JBM
PDG
05/23/2021 "See News Release 024 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2021-KK-00698
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
BRYANT SCOTT TANNER
On Supervisory Writ to the 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St. Tammany
Granted. The S tate is ordered to expeditiously designate for relator’ s
defense counsel the order in which the State intends to call defense counsel’s cases
for trial on Tuesday, June 1, 2021. See State v. Simpson, 551 So.2d 1303, 1305 (La.
1989) (“Since adequate notice is a fundamental element of due process, the
criminal docket for a particular day must indicate the order in which cases are to be
called for trial.”) (citations omitted), citing State v. Ray, 474 So.2d 954 (La. 1985).
In any event, this list shall be provided no later than Wednesday, May 26, 2021.
We are mindful that the State has the ultimate authority to determine
“whom, when, and how” to prosecute, and circumstances may, at times, require a
departure from the ordered list. See La.C.Cr.P. art. 61; State v. Chapman, 10-1510
(La. 10/29/10), 46 So.3d 660 . Nonetheless, the State remains obligated to provide
defendants with fair notice of the probability that their cases will or will not go to
trial on the date assigned. Id. The State should also be mindful that, while the Sixth
Amendment primarily guarantees the right to effective counsel, it also includes the
right to an attorney who has been given adequate time to prepare for trial. Wheat v.
United States, 486 U.S. 153, 159, 108 S. Ct. 1692, 1696, 100 L.Ed. 2d 140 (1988);
Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45, 53, 53 S. Ct. 55, 58, 77 L.Ed. 158 (1932).
05/23/21