Court Opinion

ID: 9957506
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-04 16:09:36.542964+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:22.864135
License: Public Domain

STATE      OF   LOUISIANA                                                               NO.    2024       KW    0149

VERSUS

ADRIAN      STOGNER                                                                      APRIL        4,       2024

In   Re:          Adrian       Stogner,         applying          for        supervisory            writs,              22nd
                  Judicial          District         Court,       Parish           of    St.    Tammany,                 No.
                  3507- F- 2020.

BEFORE:         WELCH,        WOLFE,      AND    STROMBERG,                JJ.

        WRIT DENIED            ON   THE     SHOWING MADE.                  Relator       failed       to       include
a    file -stamped          copy          of     the        application              for       postconviction

relief,         the      district           court'     s     ruling,             thereon,           the        State' s
response,         if any,       a    complete         copy       of    the       Boykin       transcript,                the
bill       of   information,           the       commitment            order,           pertinent          district
court      minutes,       or    any other            documentation that                  would       support             the
claims      set    out    in    the    writ      application.                    Supplementation               of       this

writ    application            and/ or an application                      for rehearing will not be
considered.             See     Uniform         Rules       of    Louisiana             Courts        of       Appeal,
Rules      2- 18. 7 &     4- 9.        In      the    event       relator          elects      to     file          a    new

application           with     this    court,         he    may       do    so    without       the       necessity
of obtaining  a              return       date.            Any    future          filing       on     this          issue
should include               the      entire         contents          of        this    application,                    the

missing items noted above,                      and a       copy of this             ruling.

                                                       E3
                                                       M

COURT      OF APPEAL,         FIRST    CIRCUIT

            PUTY    CLERK OF COURT
                FOR     THE    COURT