Case ID: so2d_274/html/0392-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BARHAM, J., DIXON and CALOGERO, JJ.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Emile GRANT and Albert Dixon v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.
    No. 53343.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    March 20, 1973.
   In re: Emile Grant and Albert Dixon applying for writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and for a stay order.

Writ denied. Find no error in ruling of trial court.

BARHAM, J.,

concurs in the denial but only for the reason that relator had not specified the documents desired in under the subpoena duces tecum. It is relator’s obligation to determine and specify the documents he desires subpoenaed.

DIXON and CALOGERO, JJ.,

concur in the denial. C.Cr.P. 732 requires the subpoena be issued if the documents are described and identified. However, the clerk and D. A. are not required to research the public records for the applicant.