STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS LAWRENCE DEROUEN, III
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 11-1162 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS LAWRENCE DEROUEN, III ************ APPEAL FROM THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF LAFAYETTE, NO. CR 129390 HONORABLE EDWARD D. RUBIN, DISTRICT JUDGE ************ JAMES T. GENOVESE JUDGE ************ Court composed of Sylvia R. Cooks, John D. Saunders, and James T. Genovese, Judges. APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANTAPPELLANT IS PERMITTED TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN THIRTY DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS DECISION. Michael Harson District Attorney, 15th JDC P.O. Box 3306 Lafayette, LA 70502-3306 (337) 232-5170 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: State of Louisiana Lawrence Derouen, III, Pro Se 812 Bayou to Bayou Road New Iberia, LA 70563 Genovese, Judge. On February 14, 2011, Defendant, Lawrence Derouen, III, was found guilty of the offenses of possession of a firearm on the premises of an alcoholic beverage outlet, a violation of La.R.S. 14:95.5; resisting an officer, a violation of La.R.S. 14:108; and, illegal carrying of a weapon, a violation of La.R.S. 14:95. At Defendant s sentencing hearing, the State dismissed the charge of illegal carrying of a weapon.1 The trial court sentenced Defendant to six months in the parish jail and a two hundred and fifty dollar fine on each count to run consecutively. The trial court suspended all but thirty days of the sentence and allowed Defendant to serve the thirty days on home incarceration. On March 14, 2011, Defendant filed a notice for appeal from the trial court s ruling, and the trial court granted the motion on March 16, 2011. Thereafter, on September 20, 2011, this court issued a rule to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as the judgment at issue is not appealable. Defendant submitted a response, but he did not address the issue of the non-appealable nature of the judgment. The judgment at issue is not appealable. See La.Code Crim.P. arts. 779 and 912.1. Accordingly, we hereby dismiss Defendant s appeal; however, Defendant may seek supervisory writs from the trial court s ruling. Defendant is not 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 a 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 Apparently, the assistant district attorney made a mistake when he referred to the charge that was being dismissed as illegal carrying of a weapon. From the record, it appears the charge that was dismissed was aggravated assault upon a peace officer with a firearm.
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.
