KA-0008-0730 Nonprecedential Dismissed Processed

State of Louisiana v. Brandon Devon Anders

Louisiana Court of Appeal, Third Circuit · Filed July 30, 2008

Opinion text

**********

APPEAL FROM THE
THIRTY-FIFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF GRANT, NO. 05-567
HONORABLE ALLEN A. KRAKE

**********

JOHN D. SAUNDERS
JUDGE

**********

Court composed of Ulysses G. Thibodeaux, Chief Judge, Sylvia R. Cooks, and John
D. Saunders, Judges.

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

Hon. James Patrick Lemoine
District Attorney, 35th JDC
P.O. Box 309
Colfax, LA 71417-0309
(318) 627-2971
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
State of Louisiana

Janet Dunn Malbrough
Attorney at Law
314 S. Liberty Street
Opelousas, LA 70570
(337) 407-9809
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT:
Brandon Devon Anders

Saunders, Judge.

A review of the record in this matter reveals that the Defendant, Brandon

Devon Anders, pled guilty to possession of CDS, Schedule IV, a violation of La.R.S.

40:969, on November 2, 2006, and was sentenced to serve five years at hard labor,

all of which were suspended, and he was placed on five years supervised probation.

The Defendant’s probation was revoked on February 21, 2008, and he was

ordered to serve the original sentence of five years at hard labor. On March 12, 2008,

the Defendant filed a Motion and Order of Appeal seeking review of his probation

revocation. The motion was granted on March 13, 2008.

On June 16, 2008, this court issued a rule to show why the appeal in this case

should not be dismissed as the judgment at issue is not appealable. The Defendant

failed to submit a response to the rule to show cause.

We find that the judgment at issue herein is not appealable pursuant to La.Code

Crim.P. arts. 912 and 912.1. Therefore, the appeal in the above-captioned case is

hereby dismissed. The Defendant is hereby permitted to file a proper application for

supervisory writs, in compliance with Uniform Rules—Courts of Appeal, Rule 4-3,

within thirty days from the date of this decision. The Defendant is not required to file

a notice of intent to seek writs nor 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 notice of intent to seek a supervisory writ.

APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANT IS PERMITTED TO FILE AN

APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN THIRTY DAYS

FROM THE DATE OF THIS DECISION.