Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

384 So. 2d 983

Docket No. 66120.

State v. Brown

STATE of Louisiana v. John Edward BROWN.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided May 28, 1980.

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1980-05-28

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“[t]he issue of whether defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel is more properly raised by application for a writ of habeas corpus in the district court, where a full evidentiary hearing maybe conducted if warranted.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 464 So. 2d 969 - State v. Poche

Relies on 365 So. 2d 1282 - State v. Barnes · State v. Malveaux

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1980-05-28

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently June 2000 · most notably 416 So. 2d 528 - State v. Ratcliff (1982), 428 So. 2d 444 - State v. Seiss (1983)

36 state decisions

190198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Charles B. Bice, Dist. Atty., Kermit M. Simmons, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

¶2Herman A. Castete, Sanders & Castete, Ltd., P. C., Winnfield, for defendant-appellant.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4Defendant John Edward Brown was charged by bill of information with aggravated burglary, a violation of La.R.S. 14:60. On October 24, 1977, he was tried before a twelve person jury and found guilty as charged. Thereafter the court sentenced defendant to serve twenty years at hard labor. Some eighteen months later, defendant applied for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he had been denied his right of appeal. After a hearing the trial court ordered an out-of-time appeal and appointed new counsel to represent defendant. The sole issue raised on appeal relates to the effectiveness of trial counsel.[1]

¶5The issue of whether defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel is more properly raised by application for a writ of habeas corpus in the district court, where a full evidentiary hearing may be conducted if warranted. See, State v. Malveaux, 371 So.2d 820 (La.1979); State v. Barnes, 365 So.2d 1282 (La.1978).

¶6Finding no reversible error on the record before us, we affirm defendant's conviction and sentence.

NOTES

¶7[1] The defense claim that the trial court should have intervened to protect defendant's interests is actually an adjunct of the ineffectiveness argument, because it relates to the proper remedy of trial counsel's alleged shortcomings.

/384/so2d/983 · .json · Public domain