State v. Holliday

Supreme Court of Louisiana
State v. Holliday, 874 So. 2d 174 (La. 2004)
2004 La. LEXIS 1831; 2004 WL 1403327
Grant, Johnson, Kimball, Reasons, Weimer

State v. Holliday

Concurring Opinion

WEIMER, J.,

concurring in part; dissenting in part. After the trial court denied a state motion for continuance, the State entered a nolle prosequi. The State effectively subverted the trial court’s denial of the continuance when, three days later, the State filed a second bill of information charging the defendant with the same two counts the State dismissed pursuant to the nolle prosequi. I would grant to review this procedure. See State v. Love, 00-3347, pp. 1-5 (La.5/23/03), 847 So.2d 1198, 1213-1216.

Opinion of the Court

In re Holliday, Vyshaun; — Defendant; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District *175Court Div. G, No. 442-597; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2004-K-0252.

Denied.

KIMBALL, J., concurs in reasons to grant assigned by WEIMER, J. JOHNSON, J., concurs in reasons to grant assigned by WEIMER, J.

Reference

Full Case Name
STATE of Louisiana v. Vyshaun HOLLIDAY
Status
Published