Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Catalon

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit

December 23, 2014

STATE OF LOUISIANA
v.
CALVIN JAMES CATALON

APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ST. LANDRY, NO. 09-K-0637-B. HONORABLE MARION F. EDWARDS, DISTRICT JUDGE.

Earl B. Taylor, District Attorney - 27th Judicial District, Alisa Ardoin Gothreaux, Assistant District Attorney - 27th Judicial District, Opelousas, LA, COUNSEL FOR: Plaintiff/Appellant - State of Louisiana.

Pride Justin Doran, Doran & Cawthorne Law Firm, PLLC, Opelousas, LA, COUNSEL FOR: Defendant/Appellee - Calvin James Catalon.

Court composed of Ulysses Gene Thibodeaux, Chief Judge, Sylvia R. Cooks, and J. David Painter, Judges. Cooks, J., concurs in part and dissents in part.

OPINION

Page 115

[14-768 La.App. 3 Cir. 1] THIBODEAUX, Chief Judge.

The State appeals the trial court's grant of Defendant's Motion to Quash. The defense based its motion on the State's alleged failure to commence trial within the two-year prescriptive period when prosecution was instituted. The State initiated prosecution against Defendant in 2009. Subsequently, Defendant was incarcerated in another jurisdiction. After learning Defendant's out-of-state custodial location, the State failed to secure his presence in court for nearly two years. During this period, the defense filed several motions to continue. In granting Defendant's Motion to Quash, the trial court found the defense's motions to continue did not suspend prescription because they were caused by the State's delay in bringing Defendant to court. For reasons other than those cited by the trial court, we conditionally affirm. Additionally, we remand for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether a motion potentially

Page 116

suspending prescription was filed on behalf of the defense.

I.

ISSUE

We shall consider whether the trial court abused its discretion in finding no suspension occurred within the prescriptive period.

II.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.