State v. Thomas
Supreme Court of Louisiana
1Opinion of the Court
TATE, Justice.
The defendant was convicted of forgery, La.R.S. 14:72, and sentenced to six years in the penitentiary.
The defendant perfected no bills of exceptions. On his appeal, therefore, our review is limited to error discoverable from a review of the pleadings and proceedings (i. e., a review limited to errors patent on the face of the record). La.C.Cr.P. Art. 920; State v. Ash, 257 La. 337, 242 So.2d 535 (1971).
The defendant’s court-appointed counsel urges three such patent errors as cause for reversal. The most serious is the contention that the (bill of) information is fatally…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. BarksdaleSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1964
- State v. WrightSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1969
- State v. StraughanSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1956
- State v. AshSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1970
- State v. WardSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1945
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- State v. JamesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1974
- State v. MarcalSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1980
- State v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1973
- State v. ClarkSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1974
- State v. MillerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1975
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.