Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2004

State v. Holliday

State v. Holliday
Supreme Court of Louisiana · Decided May 21, 2004 · Grant, Johnson, Kimball, Reasons, Weimer
874 So. 2d 174; 2004 La. LEXIS 1831; 2004 WL 1403327 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.