On Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Orleans. •

| ¶ Writ application denied.

dissenting.

|TI would grant and docket. I agree with the concerns expressed by my col*45league, Justice Crichton, in his dissent. See also State v. Love, 2000-3847 (La.5/23/03), 847 So.2d 1198 (Weimer, J., concurring in part; dissenting in part).

would grant and assigns reasons.

hi would grant this application to consider the merits of the defendant’s case. As I recently expressed in State v. James, 2015-KK-1193 (La. Oct. 30, 2015), 182 So.3d 27, 2015 WL 6684539 I am troubled by the repeated use of the nolle prosequi procedure in a way that effectively usurps the authority of the trial judge. While I respect the discretionary authority of the district attorney to dismiss and reinstitute indictments (La.C.Cr.P.arts.61, 576, 691), I do not condone what appears to be the cavalier abuse of this process. In my view, under certain circumstances, the dismissal and f einstitütion of an indictment has the effect of circumventing a trial court’s'ruling denying the district attorney a continuance. This, in turn, interferes with the trial court’s inherent authority to control its docket (La.C.Cr.P. art. 17), and renders meaningless a trial court’s decision to deny a continuance.