CITY OF ALEXANDRIA VERSUS JEWEL VAUGHN, III
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 10-1527 CITY OF ALEXANDRIA VERSUS JEWEL VAUGHN, III ************ APPEAL FROM THE ALEXANDRIA CITY COURT PARISH OF RAPIDES, NO. A106339 HONORABLE RICHARD ERIC STARLING, JR., JUDGE ************ OSWALD A. DECUIR JUDGE ************ Court composed of Oswald A. Decuir, Jimmie C. Peters, and Billy H. Ezell, Judges. APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT IS PERMITTED TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS DECISION. Monique Yvette Metoyer City Attorney, City of Alexandria 515 Washington Street Alexandria, LA 71301 (318) 449-5176 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: City of Alexandria David Michael Williams Attorney at Law 5003 Masonic Drive, #119 Alexandria, LA 71301-3373 (318) 442-6240 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT: Jewel Vaughn, III Decuir, Judge. On October 26, 2010, the Defendant, Jewel Vaughn, III, was found guilty of the offense of domestic abuse battery, a violation of La.R.S. 14:35.3.1 The trial court sentenced the Defendant to thirty days in the Rapides Parish jail, suspended, with supervised probation for six months. On November 3, 2010, the Defendant filed a notice of intent to appeal from the trial court s ruling, and the trial court granted the motion on that date. Thereafter, on December 22, 2010, this court issued a rule to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as the judgment at issue is not appealable. The Defendant submitted no response. The judgment at issue is not appealable. See La.Code Crim.P. arts. 779 and 912.1. Accordingly, we hereby dismiss the Defendant s appeal. However, the Defendant may seek supervisory writs from the trial court s ruling. The Defendant is neither required to file notice of intent to seek writs nor obtain an order from the trial court setting a return date, as is generally required by Uniform Rules Courts of Appeal, Rule 4-3. We construe the motion for appeal as timely-filed notice of intent to seek a supervisory writ. APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT IS PERMITTED TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS DECISION. 1 Although the Defendant identified himself as Jewel Vaughn the third at trial, the bill of information shows his last name as Vaugh.
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.
