State of Louisiana v. Manal Gilbert

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 13-1325 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS MANAL GILBERT ************ APPEAL FROM THE SIXTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF IBERIA, NO. 06-1990 HONORABLE LORI A. LANDRY, DISTRICT JUDGE ************ JUDGE JIMMIE C. PETERS ************ Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, Jimmie C. Peters, and Shannon J. Gremillion, Judges.

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

Robert K. Chevalier District Attorney’s Office Iberia Street New Iberia, LA 70560 (337) 369-4420 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: State of Louisiana Carey Ellis, III P.O. Box 719 Rayville, LA 71269-0719 (318) 728-2043 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT: Manal Gilbert Peters, Judge.

Defendant-Appellant, Manal Gilbert, was charged by bill of information on November 20, 2006, with distribution of marijuana, a violation La.R.S. 40:966, in docket number 06-1990. On January 23, 3008, Defendant-Appellant entered a plea of guilty and was sentenced to thirty (30) years at hard labor, to pay court cost, and a fine of ten thousand ($10,000.00) dollars to be paid within twelve (12) months of probation. The sentence is to run concurrently with the sentence imposed in docket number 05-1798; the sentence was suspended, and Defendant-Appellant was placed on supervised probation for five (5) years. On August 27, 2012, Defendant-Appellant admitted that she violated the conditions of her probation and was ordered to serve the originally imposed sentence.

On May 29, 2013, Defendant-Appellant filed a “Motion for Out of Time Appeal” with the trial court. On June 3, 2013, the trial court denied Defendant- Appellant’s “Motion for Out of Time Appeal.” On the same date, the trial court converted Defendant-Appellant’s “Motion for Out of Time Appeal” to an “Application for Post-Conviction Relief.” Subsequently, the trial court denied Defendant-Appellant’s “Application for Post-Conviction Relief.” On June 12, 2013, Defendant-Appellant filed a “Motion for Appeal and Designation of Record” with the trial court. The trial court granted the motion on June 17, 2013.

On November 20, 2013, this court lodged the record for appeal. On December 2, 2013, this court issued a rule to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed as the judgment is not appealable. La.Code Crim.P. art. 912.

On December 26, 2013, Defendant-Appellant responded, acknowledging that the case is non-appealable but requesting that Defendant-Appellant be granted an opportunity file to an application for supervisory writs. Accordingly, the appeal in this case is hereby dismissed. 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 thirty 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, 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 WITHIN THIRTY DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS DECISION.