State of Louisiana v. Velma Hampton

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

12-1120

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

VELMA HAMPTON

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

APPEAL FROM THE
THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF EVANGELINE, NO. 90468-M
HONORABLE THOMAS F. FUSELIER, DISTRICT JUDGE

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

OSWALD A. DECUIR
JUDGE

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

Court composed of Oswald A. Decuir, Elizabeth A. Pickett, and Phyllis M. Keaty,
Judges.

APPEAL DISMISSED. THE DEFENDANT IS PERMITTED TO FILE
AN APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN FIFTEEN
DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS OPINION. APPELLATE COUNSEL’S
MOTION TO WITHDRAW IS DENIED AS MOOT.

Marcus L. Fontenot
District Attorney – 13th JDC
P. O. Drawer 780
Ville Platte, LA 70586
(337) 363-3438
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
State of Louisiana

Annette Fuller Roach
Attorney at Law
P. O. Box 1747
Lake Charles, LA 70602-1747
(337)436-2900
COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT:
Velma Hampton

Decuir, Judge.

The Defendant, Velma Hampton, was charged and convicted of disturbing

the peace, in violation of La.R.S. 14:103(A)(2). On August 9, 2012, she was

sentenced to serve three days in the parish jail, suspended. She was placed on

probation for one month with the condition that she pay a $50 fine and a $150

witness fee within thirty days. The Defendant was also ordered to pay an Indigent

Defender Board assessment of $50.

On August 31, 2012, the Defendant filed a “Motion for Appeal and

Designation of Record.” An appeal was granted that day, and the Louisiana

Appellate Project was appointed to represent the Defendant on appeal. The appeal

was subsequently lodged with this court September 26, 2012. On September 27,

2012, this court issued an order requiring the Defendant to show cause why the

appeal should not be dismissed as the judgment at issue is not an appealable

judgment. The Defendant responded, acknowledging that the matter is not

appealable. She requests that the motion for appeal filed in the trial court be

considered as a timely notice to file a writ of review and that she be given an

opportunity to file an application for supervisory review within thirty days of this

court’s opinion. Appellate counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record

noting that the Louisiana Appellate Project is authorized to handle appealable cases

only.

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

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

supervisory writs within fifteen (15) days of the date of this decision. The

Defendant is not required to file a notice of intent to seek writs, nor must she

obtain an order from the trial court setting a return date, as is generally required by

2

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. Additionally, counsel’s

motion to withdraw is denied as moot.

APPEAL DISMISSED. THE DEFENDANT IS PERMITTED TO FILE AN

APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS

OF THE DATE OF THIS OPINION. APPELLATE COUNSEL’S MOTION

TO WITHDRAW IS DENIED AS MOOT.

3