STATE OF LOUISIANA Vs. ERIK NUNEZ
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA * NO. 2015-K-0164 VERSUS * COURT OF APPEAL ERIK NUNEZ * FOURTH CIRCUIT * STATE OF LOUISIANA * * ******* CONSOLIDATED WITH: CONSOLIDATED WITH: STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2015-K-0449 VERSUS BRANDON LICCIARDI LANDRIEU, J., CONCURS WITH REASONS I agree with the majority that the allotment process in the instant case violated the defendant’s right to due process. I write separately to note that the Louisiana Supreme Court jurisprudence distinguishes between a defendant who challenges the allotment process prior to trial and one who challenges the allotment of his case on appeal, post-conviction. A defendant challenging a process of random allotment prior to trial need not prove actual prejudice but need only establish that the prosecuting authority has the ability to influence the allotment process. See, e.g.: State v. Reed, 95–0648 (La. 4/28/95), 653 So.2d 1176 (per curiam); State v. Payne, 556 So.2d 47 (La.1990); State v. Simpson, 551 So.2d 1303 (La.1989) (per curiam). See also, State v. Huls, 95-0541 (La. App. 1 Cir. 5/29/96), 676 So.2d 160. I further agree with the concurring opinion of Judge Tobias that the proper procedural vehicle by which to challenge the allotment of a criminal case is not a motion to quash.
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.
