Court Opinion

ID: 9670277
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 03:18:07.199641+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:03.565445
License: Public Domain

LOUIS J. CECI, J.
{concurring). I join the opinion of the majority and agree with the reasoning used by the court to reach its result in this case.
I write separately to point out that in its certification request, the court of appeals, in a footnote, found it necessary to urge this court to "expedite” our consideration of this certification request. (Certification, p. 11, n. 4.)
The petition for a supervisory writ was filed in the court of appeals on February 6, 1987. Almost two months later, the court of appeals filed its certification request with this court. This two-month delay was the responsibility of the court of appeals. By requesting that this certification be "expedited,” the court of appeals implies that in the past this court has not disposed of certification requests in a speedy manner. That is simply not true.