Case Name: The State of Louisiana vs. Segura et al.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1887-05
Citations: 39 La. Ann. 683
Docket Number: No. 9982
Parties: The State of Louisiana vs. Segura et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Annual Reports
Volume: 39
Pages: 683–684

Head Matter:
No. 9982.
The State of Louisiana vs. Segura et al.
An appeal taken, by the State to a judgment quashing the general venire of jurors on the ground that the term of court at which it was impannelled was irregular and illegal, and presented here after the jury had been discharged and the term had lapsed, will not be entertained, because any judgment we might render would be utterly futile andincon sequential.
It might be different if the indictment had been found by the grand jury formed out of the venire quashed, which, however, is not the case.
APPEAL from the Twenty-first District Court, Parish of Iberia. Gates, J.
G. H. Mouton, District Attorney, for the State, Appellant.
A. & O. Fontelieu and J. A. Breaux for Defendants and Appellees.

Opinion:
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Fenner, J.
This is an appeal taken by the State from a judgment of the court» qua quashing the general venire of jurors drawn to serve at a term of court to be held on the first Monday of April, 1887, on the ground that, owing to certain irregularities in the fixing of said term, it was illegal.
The jury has been discharged; the term has passed; and we would be at a loss to conceive of any object in prosecuting such an appeal, if the district attorney had not informed us in his brief that the grand jury impanelled at said term had returned sundry true bills into court, and that he desires the Supreme Court to pass on the question, in order to be advised as to what course he should pursue in reference to them. But those cases are not before us, and the indictment in this case was not found by that grand-jury.
As regards the present appeal, the questions presented are of a purely moot character, and any decision we might render would be brutum fulmen and entirely inconsequential. We must decline to engage in such superfluous and profitless discussion.
It is, therefore, ordered that this appeal be dismissed.