FOR IMMEDIATE NEWS RELEASE
NEWS RELEASE # 025
FROM: CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
The Opinions handed down on the 11th day of April, 2007, are as follows:
BY CALOGERO, C.J.:
2006-KK-1045 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. KEITH WALKER (Parish of Orleans)
For the reasons set forth above, the district court ruling granting the defendant's motion to suppress is vacated and the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings.
DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT VACATED; CASE REMANDED TO THE DISTRICT COURT
JOHNSON, J., dissents and assigns reasons.
BY JOHNSON, J.:
2006-C -1736 SOUTHEAST WIRELESS NETWORK, INC., SLAYDON INVESTMENT, INC., AND CELIA KATZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HER CAPACITY AS INDEPENDENT EXECUTRIX FOR THE SUCCESSION OF SAMUEL B. KATZ v. U.S. TELEMETRY CORPORATION, U.S. TELEMETRY NETWORK, INC., K. STEVEN ROBERTS, THOMAS L. SIEBERT, DONALD M. CLARKE, S. ANDREW BANKS, CHARLES M. BRUCE AND JAMES K. GABLE (Parish of E. Baton Rouge)
For the above reasons, the ruling of the court of appeal is AFFIRMED. The trial court can properly exercise jurisdiction over defendant, James K. Gable.
KIMBALL, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
BY VICTORY, J.:
2004-KA-0204 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. DANIEL JOSEPH BLANK (Parish of Ascension)
(First Degree Murder)
For the reasons assigned herein, the defendant's conviction and death sentence are affirmed. In the event this judgment becomes final on direct review when either: (1) the defendant fails to petition timely the United States Supreme Court for certiorari; or (2) that Court denies his petition for certiorari; and either (a) the defendant, having filed for and been denied certiorari, fails to petition the United States Supreme Court timely, under its prevailing rules, for rehearing of denial of certiorari; or (b) that Court denies his petition for rehearing, the trial judge shall, upon receiving notice from this Court under La. Code Crim. Proc. art. 923 of finality of direct appeal, and before signing the warrant of execution, as provided by La. R.S.15:567(B), immediately notify the Louisiana Indigent Defense Assistance Board and provide the Board with reasonable time in which: (1) to enroll counsel to represent the defendant in any State post-conviction proceedings, if appropriate, pursuant to it's authority under La. R.S. 15:149.1; and (2) to litigate expeditiously the claims raised in that original application, if filed in the state courts.
CALOGERO, C.J., dissents for reasons assigned by Kimball, J.
KIMBALL, J., dissents and assigns reasons.
BY KNOLL, J.:
2006-KO-1755 STATE OF LOUISIANA v. GREGORY RUIZ (Parish of Iberia)
The defendant's convictions for possession of cocaine and distribution of cocaine, in violation of La. Rev. Stat. 40:967, are affirmed. Because the trial court has found the defendant to be a second offender, having previously been convicted of two counts of distribution of cocaine, this matter is remanded for sentencing pursuant to either the sentencing enhancement provisions of La. Rev. Stat. 40:982 or Louisiana's Habitual Offender Law, La. Rev. Stat. 15:529.1. The State may not validly seek multiple enhancement of the defendant's sentence based on the same set of prior convictions.
AFFIRMED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.
KIMBALL, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
JOHNSON, J., concurs.
2006-C -2001 C/W
2006-C -2164 JOHN AND KLEA HEBERT v. RAPIDES PARISH POLICE JURY, ET AL. (Parish of Rapides)
For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the judgment of the court of appeal and render judgment finding DOTD had no liability, thereby dismissing plaintiffs' claim against DOTD, with prejudice.
REVERSED and RENDERED.
JOHNSON, J., dissents.
TRAYLOR, J., concurs in the result.
KNOLL, J., additionally concurs with reasons.
2005-OB-2317 IN RE: EDWARD A. DOSKEY
After hearing oral argument, reviewing the evidence, and considering the law, we conclude petitioner, Edward A. Doskey, is eligible to be conditionally admitted to the practice of law in Louisiana, subject to a probationary period of one year. Should petitioner commit any misconduct during the period of probation, his conditional right to practice may be terminated or he may be subjected to other discipline pursuant to the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement.
CONDITIONAL ADMISSION GRANTED.
2006-C -1989 THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS v. SEWERAGE & WATER BOARD OF NEW ORLEANS; BOH BROS. CONSTRUCTION CO., L.L.C.; RENAISSANCE INTEGRATED SOLUTIONS, LLC; AND RIS NEW ORLEANS, LLC (Parish of Orleans)
Accordingly, we vacate the judgment of the court of appeal without addressing the issues raised by the City or the Council.
2006-C -2092 THURMAN AND ROSEMARY KAISER v. HARRY HARDIN, UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, AMY MULLEN, STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO. (Parish of Orleans)
For the reasons assigned, the judgment of the court of appeal, insofar as it increased the damage awards in favor of Thurman Kaiser and Rosemary Kaiser, is reversed. The judgment of the district court is reinstated and affirmed in its entirety. All costs in this court are assessed against plaintiffs.
2006-CA-2814 C/W 2007-CA-0109 WASHINGTON ST. TAMMANY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. v. LOUISIANA
PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION (Parish of E. Baton Rouge)
In light of the foregoing, the decision of the Nineteenth Judicial District Court is vacated. Additionally, Order No. U-27686 of the Commission, dated November 16, 2005, is likewise vacated. The matter is remanded to the Public Service Commission for consideration of theadministrative law judge's ruling on the exception of prescription filed by Cleco in response to WST's petition for de novo review filed by fax on the fourteenth day following the staff opinion regarding violation of the 300 foot rule.
JUDGMENT VACATED; COMMISSION ORDER VACATED; REMANDED TO PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION.
2006-B -2860 IN RE: PHILIP LAWRENCE
Upon review of the findings and recommendations of the hearing committee and disciplinary board, and considering the record, briefs, and oral argument, it is ordered that Philip Lawrence, Louisiana Bar Roll Number 22705, be and he hereby is suspended from the practice of law for a period of eighteen months. All costs and expenses in the matter are assessed against respondent in accordance with Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 10.1, with legal interest to commence thirty days form the date of finality of this court's judgment until paid.
TRAYLOR, J., dissents and would impose greater penalty.