State v. Armstrong
Also decided on this docket: La., February 25, 1994 632 So. 2d 768
State v. Armstrong, 637 So. 2d 448 (La. 1994).
The holding in the court’s own words
PER CURIAM: After conducting an independent review of the record and considering the remarks of *449 counsel during oral argument, we conclude that the decision of the Fourth Circuit does not require the exercise of our supervisory-authority.
Quoted verbatim from the opinion — no paraphrase, nothing generated. Not yet human-reviewed. How we find the holding.
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Wright v. State 632 So. 2d 768
Opinion text
PER CURIAM: After conducting an independent review of the record and considering the remarks of *449 counsel during oral argument, we conclude that the decision of the Fourth Circuit does not require the exercise of our supervisory-authority. Cf., La.S.Ct. Rule X, § 1(a). Accordingly, we recall our order of February 25, 1994, 632 So.2d 768 , as improvidently granted. KIMBALL, J., not on panel. SHORTESS, J., Judge, First Circuit Court of Appeal, sitting in place of DENNIS, J.