State of Louisiana v. Raymond J. Jackson

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

KA07-677 consolidated with KH07-634

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

RAYMOND J. JACKSON

**********

APPEAL FROM THE
TWENTY-SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF ST. LANDRY, NO. 03-K-4552-B
HONORABLE ELLIS J. DAIGLE, DISTRICT JUDGE

**********

MICHAEL G. SULLIVAN
JUDGE

**********

Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, Michael G. Sullivan, and Elizabeth A. Pickett,
Judges.

APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
IS PERMITTED TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR
SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
FROM THE DATE OF THIS DECISION.

Hon. Earl J. Taylor
District Attorney - 27th JDC
P. O. Drawer 1968
Opelousas, LA 70571
(337) 948-3041
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
State of Louisiana

Raymond Jackson, #458624
Avoyelles Correctional Center, Cajun 3-B-2
1630 Prison Road
Cottonport, LA 71327
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT:
Raymond J. Jackson

Sullivan, Judge.

The Defendant, Raymond J. Jackson, was charged by bill of information with

possession of cocaine. The State amended the bill charging the Defendant with

possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, a violation of La.R.S. 40:967. On

January 16, 2006, the Defendant was found guilty as charged by a jury. On May 12,

2006, he was sentenced to ten years at hard labor, the first two years without benefit

of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence.

On March 9, 2007, the Defendant filed in the trial court a “Motion for Out-of

Time Appeal” requesting the trial court grant him an out-of-time appeal because his

attorney failed to file a motion for appeal. The trial court denied the motion. The

Defendant then filed an “Intent to Seek Appeal” from the trial court’s denial of his

motion for an out-of-time appeal. The trial court granted the request.

On May 31, 2007, the appellate record was lodged in this court. On June 1,

2007, this court issued a rule to show cause why the appeal in this case should not be

dismissed, as the judgment at issue is not appealable. The Defendant failed to submit

a sufficient response to the rule to show cause.

The proper procedural vehicle for the Defendant to seek review of a denial of

a motion by the trial court is via supervisory writs, not by appeal. La.Code Crim.P.

art. 912.1. Therefore, the appeal in this case is hereby dismissed.

The Defendant-Appellant, Raymond J. Jackson, is hereby permitted to file a

proper application for supervisory writs in compliance with Uniform Rules—Courts

of Appeal, Rule 4, no later than thirty days from the date of this decision. The

Defendant is not required to file a notice of intent to seek writs or to obtain an order

setting a return date pursuant to Uniform Rules—Courts of Appeal, Rule 4-3, as we

hereby construe the motion for appeal as a timely-filed notice of intent to seek a

supervisory writ.

1

Additionally, on May 17, 2007, the Defendant filed a writ of mandamus with

this court which was consolidated with the current appeal. The Defendant filed in the

trial court a “Motion and Order for Return Date,” requesting a return date on his

appeal and appellate counsel be appointed. The trial court rejected the filing stating,

“A return date was fixed in accordance with the law on March 13, 2007.” The

Defendant is before this court requesting that this court order the trial court to provide

him with a return date on his appeal and provide him with appellate counsel.

However, since Relator’s appeal is dismissed, his writ of mandamus is rendered moot.

APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT IS PERMITTED TO

FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN THIRTY

DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS DECISION.

2