Case ID: so2d_648/html/0909-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE ex rel. Rudolph ANDERSON v. CLERK OF COURT, et al.
    No. 94-KH-1381.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    Jan. 6, 1995.
   In re Anderson, Rudolph; — Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans Criminal District Court Div. “B” No. 303 — 669; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 94KW-0429.

Granted. The district court is ordered to provide relator with a copy of the charging document in his case. Although as a general matter incarcerated indigents must demonstrate a particularized need for a court document before receiving a copy of it free of charge, see, e.g., Stewart v. Lombard, 94-0040 (La. 6/3/94), 637 So.2d 496; cf. United States v. MacCollum, 426 U.S. 317, 325, 96 S.Ct. 2086, 2091, 48 L.Ed.2d 666 (1976); State ex rel. Nash v. State, 604 So.2d 1054 (La.App. 1st Cir.1992); LSA — R.S. 44:32(C)(l)(a), the bill of information or grand jury indictment charging them with committing a crime form an exception to that rule. La.C.Cr.P. art. 498; see, e.g., State ex rel. Foret v. State, 617 So.2d 900 (La.1993); State v. Martin, 516 So.2d 124 (La.1987). As to the other documents he requests, relator’s application is denied. He has not demonstrated the required particularized need. See MacCollum, 426 U.S. at 329, 96 S.Ct. at 2093 (Blaekmun, J., concurring).

LEMMON, J., not on panel.