State Of Louisiana v. Jamir Williams

Supreme Court of Louisiana
October 14, 2025
Chief Deputy Clerk of Court
For the Court
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
JAMIR WILLIAMS
No. 2025-KK-00575
_ _
_ _ _ _
I
N RE: State of Louisiana - Applicant Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory Writ,
Parish of Orleans Criminal, Criminal District Court Number(s) 564- 197, Court of
Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Number(s) 2025-K-0169;
_ _ _ _ _ _
October 14, 2025
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
Crain, J., concurs.
JBM
JLW
JDH
PDG
JMG
CRC
10/14/2025 "See News Release 045 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2025-KK-00575
STATE OF LOUISIANA
VS.
JAMIR WILLIAMS
On Supervisory Writ to the Criminal District Court, Parish of Orleans Criminal
PER CURIAM
Writ granted. Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure article 701 provides remedies
for the failure to timely file a bill of information or an indictment, and for the failure
to timely commence trial after a defendant files a motion for a speedy trial. The
failure to timely file a bill of information or indictment “shall result in release of the
defendant [and the release of the bail obligation] if, after contradictory hearing with
the district attorney, just cause for the failure is not shown.” La. C.Cr.P. a rt. 701
B(2)(b). A similar remedy is provided for the failure to timely commence trial. See
La C.Cr.P. art. 701 D(2).
No such remedy is provided in article 701 for a trial court’s failure to arraign
a defendant within thirty days, as required by subpart C. To the contrary, subpart C
merely states that “[u]pon filing of a bill of information or indictment, the district
attorney shall set the matter for arraignment within thirty days unless just cause for
a longer delay is shown.” Accordingly, the trial court lacked authority to release the
defendant from his bail obligation when the arraignment did not take place within
the time period set forth in Article 701. Further, defendant has not demonstrated any
prejudice resulting from the delay in his arraignment. See State v. Miller, 18-1174,
(La. App. 1 Cir. 10/15/18), --- So. 3d ----, ----, 2018 WL 5013665 (unpub.). Nor did
defendant assert a right to an arraignment prior to filing his Motion to Release Bond

Obligation. See id. The trial court’s ruling granting defendant’s Motion to Release
Bond Obligation for Failure to Arraign Within 30 Days of Indictment is reversed.
This matter is remanded for further proceedings.