STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS HARRY P. CARMOUCHE
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 13-1108 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS HARRY P. CARMOUCHE ************ APPEAL FROM THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF AVOYELLES, NO. 173,708 HONORABLE RONALD COX, DISTRICT JUDGE ************ JOHN D. SAUNDERS JUDGE ************ Court composed of John D. Saunders, Billy H. Ezell, and Phyllis M. Keaty, Judges. APPEAL DISMISSED. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT IS PERMITTED TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS WITHIN FIFTEEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS DECISION. Charles A. Riddle, III District Attorney P.O. Box 1200 Marksville, LA 71351 (318) 253-6587 COUNSEL FOR APPELLEE: State of Louisiana Roshell Jones 405 W. Main Street, Suite 107 Lafayette, LA 70501 (337) 504-3437 COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT: Harry P. Carmouche Saunders, Judge. Defendant-Appellant, Harry P. Carmouche, was convicted of three counts of cruelty to animals, a misdemeanor, on June 27, 2013. On the same date, he was sentenced to six months in the parish jail on each count, with six months suspended and two years of probation, and restitution of $500.00 for each of the five dogs. On July 9, 2013, counsel for Defendant filed a Motion for Appeal, Return Date, and Designation of the Record. The trial court granted the motion for appeal on July 16, 2013. On September 27, 2013, this court lodged the appeal record in this case. On October 1, 2013, this court issued a rule to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed as the judgment at issue is not an appealable judgment. On October 9, 2013, Defense counsel responded, acknowledging that the judgment is non-appealable but is requesting that the appeal be remanded back to the trial court and that he be permitted to file an application for supervisory writs. Accordingly, the appeal in this case is hereby dismissed. Defendant-Appellant is hereby permitted to file a proper application for supervisory writs, in compliance with Uniform Rules Courts of Appeal, Rule 4, no later than fifteen days from the date of this decision. Defendant is not required to file a notice of intent to seek writs nor obtain an order setting a return date pursuant to Uniform Rules Courts of Appeal, Rule 4-3, as we hereby 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 FIFTEEN DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS DECISION.
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.
