State of Louisiana v. Bionca Joseph AKA Bionca Shante' Joseph

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

15-1003

STATE OF LOUISIANA

VERSUS

BIONCA JOSEPH
aka BIONCA SHANTE’ JOSEPH

************
APPEAL FROM THE
FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF LAFAYETTE, DOCKET NOS. 15-0192, 15-0193
HONORABLE THOMAS F. PORTER, IV, DISTRICT JUDGE

************
BILLY H. EZELL
JUDGE
************

Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, Billy H. Ezell, and John E. Conery, Judges.

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

MICHAEL GUIDRY
City Prosecutor
2100 Jefferson Street, Suite C
Lafayette, LA 70501
COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE:
City of Lafayette

BIONCA JOSEPH
aka BIONCA SHANTE’ JOSEPH
152 N. General Marshall
Lafayette, LA 70501
In Proper Person

Ezell, Judge.

On February 3, 2015, Defendant-Appellant, Bionca Joseph, aka Bionca

Shante’ Joseph, was charged with two counts of resisting an officer, in violation of

La.R.S. 14:108. On August 12, 2015, Defendant-Appellant was convicted of two

counts of resisting an officer and was sentenced to fifteen days on each count in the

parish jail. The sentences were suspended, and Defendant-Appellant was placed

on six months of unsupervised probation. The sentences and probation were

ordered to run concurrently. Defendant-Appellant was also ordered to pay two

hundred and ten dollars on each count in fines and court costs.

On September 11, 2015, Defendant-Appellant filed a “MOTION TO

APPEAL JUDGMENT” with the trial court. The trial court granted Defendant-

Appellant’s motion on September 29, 2015, with a return date of October 16, 2015.

On October 20, 2015, this court lodged the appeal record. On October 23,

2015, this court issued a rule to show cause why the appeal should not be

dismissed as non-appealable, since the offenses at issue are misdemeanors.

La.Code Crim.P. art. 912.1.

Defendant-Appellant filed a “BRIEF” in response to the rule to show cause

on November 9, 2015; however, the “BRIEF” addresses the merits, rather than the

appealability of the judgment.

The offenses are non-appealable; therefore, the appeal in his case is hereby

dismissed. However, Defendant-Appellant is hereby permitted to file a proper

application for supervisory writs, in compliance with Uniform Rules—Courts of

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

Defendant-Appellant 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,
1

Rule 4-3, as we hereby construe the motion for appeal as a timely-filed notice of

intent to seek a supervisory writ.

APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT IS PERMITTED TO

FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITH THIS

COURT WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS

DECISION.

2