Case ID: so2d_359/html/0984-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. CALOGERO, Justice,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Louisiana v. Louis F. LUCIO.
    No. 61352.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    June 19, 1978.
    A. J. Boudreaux, Staff Appeals Counsel, Indigent Defender Bd., New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.
    William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., John M. Mam-oulides, Dist. Atty., James D. Maxwell, Asst. Dist. Atty., Abbott J. Reeves, Director, Research and Appeals Div., Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Defendant was charged by bill of information with the crime of aggravated battery, La. R.S. 14:34. The defendant was found guilty as charged and sentenced to serve ten years at hard labor. On appeal he relies on two assignments of error for reversal of his conviction and sentence.

We have examined the entire record and find that the errors complained of probably did not result in a miscarriage of justice, were not prejudicial to the substantial rights of accused, and did not constitute a substantial violation of a constitutional or statutory right. Accordingly, we affirm the defendant’s conviction and sentence.

CALOGERO, J., concurs and assigns reasons.

CALOGERO, Justice,

concurring.

By assignment of error number 1 defendant properly complains of inadmissible hearsay. What an officer had related to him by witnesses about the event shortly after the stabbing was not part of the res gestae, as the state contends. Nonetheless, I concur in the affirmance of this conviction believing that there was insufficient prejudice to warrant a reversal.