State of Louisiana v. Chevelle Traylor

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

12-203

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

CHEVELLE TRAYLOR

************

APPEAL FROM THE
THIRTY-THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF ALLEN, NO. CR-2007-4208
HONORABLE PATRICIA A. COLE, DISTRICT JUDGE

************

SHANNON J. GREMILLION
JUDGE

************

Court composed of Elizabeth A. Pickett, Shannon J. Gremillion, and Phyllis M.
Keaty, Judges

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

H. Todd Nesom
District Attorney – 33rd JDC
P.O. Box 839
Oberlin, LA 70655
(337) 639-2641
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
State of Louisiana

David Deshotels
P.O. Box 399
Oberlin, LA 70655
(337) 639-4309
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT:
Chevelle Traylor

Chevelle Traylor
Avoyelles Parish Sheriff’s Office
675 Government St.
Marksville, LA 71351
In proper person

Gremillion, Judge.

On May 12, 2008, the Defendant, Chevelle Traylor, pled guilty to

unauthorized entry of an inhabited dwelling. He was sentenced to six years at hard

labor, three and one-half years suspended, and placed on three years of probation.

Additionally, the trial court ordered conditions of probation. On November 29,

2011, the Defendant’s probation was revoked and the original sentence imposed.

On January 25, 2012, the Defendant filed a pro se motion seeking an appeal

of his probation revocation proceeding held on November 29, 2011.

On February 17, 2012, this court issued a rule to show cause why the appeal

should not be dismissed as the judgment is non-appealable. The Defendant did not

respond.

The judgment at issue is not appealable. See La.Code Crim.P. art. 912.1;

State v. Johnson, 06-942 (La.App. 3 Cir. 9/13/06), 938 So.2d 804. Accordingly,

we hereby dismiss the Defendant’s appeal. The Defendant may seek supervisory

writs within thirty (30) days of the date of this decision. The Defendant is not

required to file a notice of intent to seek writs, nor must he obtain an order from

the trial court setting a return date, as is generally required by Uniform

RulesCourts of Appeal, Rule 4-3. We construe the motion for appeal as a

timely-filed notice of intent to seek a supervisory writ.

APPEAL DISMISSED. THE DEFENDANT IS PERMITTED TO FILE AN

APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF

THE DATE OF THIS OPINION.