STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS CARY T. MONROE
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS CARY T. MONROE NO. 07-KA-789 coURT OF APPEA½ FIFTH CIRCUIT FN.ED MAR 1 1 2000 FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF LOUISIANA ON APPEAL FROM THE TWENTY-FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF JEFFERSON, STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 06-5293, DIVISION "E" HONORABLE JOHN J. MOLAISON, JR., JUDGE PRESIDING MARCH l1, 2008 WALTER J. ROTHSCHILD JUDGE Panel composed of Judges Marion F. Edwards, Walter J. Rothschild, and Fredericka Homberg Wicker PAUL D. CONNICK, JR. DISTRICT ATTORNEY Twenty-Fourth Judicial District Parish of Jefferson TERRY M. BOUDREAUX ANNE WALLIS JEFFREY J. HAND ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEYS 200 Derbigny Street Gretna, Louisiana 70053 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF/APPELLEE MARY E. ROPER Attorney at Law Louisiana Appellate Project 830 Main Street Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70802-5597 COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT/APPELLANT AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED. On October 12, 2006, defendant, Cary T. Monroe, was charged by the Jefferson Parish District Attorney with distribution of cocaine, in violation of R.S. 40:967(A). On October 13, 2006, he entered a plea of not guilty. Defendant withdrew his plea of not guilty and entered a guilty plea on June 27, 2007. During the guilty plea colloquy, defendant admitted that he violated LSA-R.S. 40:967(A) by knowingly and intentionally distributing cocaine on August 15, 2006. In accordance with the plea agreement, defendant was sentenced to fifteen years at hard labor, concurrent with any other sentences he was serving, with the first two years to be served without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. As part of the plea agreement, the State agreed not to file a habitual offender bill of information against defendant. On July 13, 2007, defendant filed a motion for appeal, which was granted. -2- On November 13, 2007, defense counsel filed a brief on behalf of defendant and a motion to withdraw in this Court.' Defense counsel also notified defendant of the motion to withdraw and of defendant's right to file a supplemental pro se brief. On December 4, 2007, a letter was sent from the Clerk of this Court to defendant, advising him that he could file a supplemental brief with this Court. However, as of the date of this opinion, no supplemental brief has been filed. DISCUSSION Defendant's appellate counsel has filed a brief, pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), asserting that she reviewed the record and found no non-frivolous issues which arguably support reversal of defendant's conviction and sentence on appeal. Defense counsel requests that this Court review the record for errors patent on the face of the record. Defense counsel's brief was filed in conformity with all of the requirements necessary to file an Anders brief. When counsel files an Anders brief, an appellate court reviews several items: a) the bill of information to ensure that the charge is proper, b) all minute entries to ensure that defendant was present at all crucial stages of the prosecution, c) all pleadings in the record, and d) all transcripts to determine whether any ruling of the trial court provides a basis for appeal. State v. Leonard, 04-708, pp. 4-5 (La. App. 5 Cir. 12/14/04), 892 So.2d 66, 69. In this case, the trial court made no pre-plea rulings that could form the basis of an appeal. During the guilty plea colloquy, defendant admitted that he knowingly and intentionally distributed cocaine on August 15, 2006. The bill of information reveals that defendant was properly charged. Defendant was furthermore present during all crucial stages of the proceedings. He entered a free * Defense counsel's motion to withdraw was initially denied by this Court on November 14, 2007. -3- and voluntary guilty plea after being properly advised of his rights in accordance with Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969). Defendant also received a legal sentence. After an extensive independent review of the entire record, we find no nonfrivolous issues that could be argued on appeal. Thus, defense counsel is entitled to withdraw from this case. Further, after conducting an error patent review pursuant to LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 920; State v. Oliveaux, 312 So. 2d 337 (La. 1975); and State v. Weiland, 556 So. 2d 175 (La. App. 5 Cir. 1990), we find no errors patent. Accordingly, we affirm defendant's conviction and sentence. DECREE For the reasons set forth above, we affirm defendant's conviction and sentence. Defense counsel's request to withdraw from this case is hereby granted. AFFIRMED; MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED. -4- EDWARD A. DUFRESNE, JR. CHIEF JUDGE PETER J. FITZGERALD, JR. CLERK OF COURT THOMAS F. DALEY MARION F. EDWARDS SUSAN M. CHEHARDY CLARENCE E. McMANUS WALTER J. ROTHSCHILD FREDERICKA H. WICKER GREG G. GUIDRY GENEVIEVE L. VERRETTE CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK JUDGES FIFTH CIRCUIT 101 DERBIGNY STREET (70053) POST OFFICE BOX 489 GRETNA, LOUISIANA 70054 www.fiftheircuit.org MARY E. LEGNON FIRST DEPUTY CLERK TROY A. BROUSSARD DIRECTOR OF CENTRAL STAFF (504) 376-1400 (504) 376-1498 FAX NOTICE OF JUDGMENT AND CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I CERTIFY THAT A COPY OF THE OPINION IN THE BELOW-NUMBERED MATTER HAS BEEN MAILED ON OR DELIVERED THIS DAY MARCH 11, 2008 TO THE TRIAL JUDGE, COUNSEL OF RECORD AND ALL PARTIES NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, AS LISTED BELOW: PE 07-KA-789 Terry M. Boudreaux Assistant District Attorney Parish of Jefferson 200 Derbigny Street Gretna, LA 70053 Mary E. Roper Attorney at Law Louisiana Appellate Project 830 Main Street Baton Rouge, LA 70802-5597 , JR
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
