Document: 376 U.S. 336 84 S.Ct. 777 11 L.Ed.2d 750 Sidney ARCENEAUX, Petitioner,v.STATE OF LOUISIANA. No. 76. Argued Jan. 15, 1964. Decided March 9, J. Minos Simon, Lafayette, La., for petitioner. Bertrand DeBlanc, respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 Petitioner, who was before the state court 'on a charge of vagrancy,'1 raised several objections to denial preliminary hearing. The third these reads as follows: 2 '* * that bill information charges no offense known law and if it an within meaning intentment (sic) Louisiana statute, then both statute are unconstitutional, null, void, being violative guaranties contained in United States Constitution Laws; *' 3 LSA—Rev.Stat. § 15:154 provides 'after indictment found or filed, shall be wholly discretion district court, not subject review by any other order refuse examination; *.' 4 when he asked hearing, incarcerated charged affidavit with vagrancy. Neither nor had been filed against him. In proceedings motion examination granted hearing set 8, 1962, continued 9. On 9 District Attorney charging accused crime Thereupon, judge recalled his examination. 5 Petitioner appealed Supreme Court, asking writ habeas corpus alternative certiorari, mandamus, prohibition. application remedies certiorari,2 mandamus prohibition were sought alternatively having stand trial under Vagrancy Act. petitioner said: 6 'The criminal offense, did forth alleged language such null Federal State Constitutions.' 7 prayer relief ask d Court rule 'upon constitutionality' vagrancy whether statutes constitutional provisions cited 'are contrary Constitution, particular Fifth, Sixth Fourteenth Amendments thereto.' 8 Thus tried raise question constitutionality statute. denied writs on 16, saying 'Writ refused. There is error ruling complained of.' petition certiorari this 31, 1962. Two months later, i.e., May appeared Lafayette city (to which case transferred Court) pleaded guilty He sentenced serve four jail, but given credit time served forthwith discharged. We 372 906, 83 731, 716, has argued. 10 seems that, exceptions relevant here, only orders finally dispose cases can appealed. See 15:540. 'A disposed judgment dismisses prosecution, after verdict, grants refuses grant new trial, arrests arrest judgment, imposes sentence.' 15:541. 'ruling of' referred recalling Under our decisions field, intermediate similar overruling plea bar (Eastman v. Ohio, 299 505, 57 21, 81 L.Ed. 374) demurrer (Polakow's Realty Experts Alabama, 319 750, 63 1155, 87 1705). Hence 28 U.S.C. 1257, character 'final' judgment. therefore dismiss lack jurisdiction, without intimation what rights, any, may have Civil Rights Acts. 12 Writ dismissed. challenged, 14:10( (1962 Cum.Supp.), provides: following persons vagrancy: '8. Persons near structure, movable, vessel, private grounds, able account their lawful presence therein; do concern ourselves aspects corpus, is, all, form sought.

Category: 8