From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Melbert

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit
Oct 12, 1983
438 So. 2d 1292 (La. Ct. App. 1983)

Opinion

No. CR83-307.

October 12, 1983.

APPEAL FROM 33RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ALLEN, STATE OF LOUISIANA, HONORABLE EDWARD M. MOUSER, J.

Kenneth Ray Rush, Oakdale, for defendant-appellant.

Alfred R. Ryder, Dist. Atty., John A. Duck, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., Oberlin, for plaintiff-appellee.

Before STOKER, LABORDE and KNOLL, JJ.


The defendant, Louis Melbert, was charged by bill of information with possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, a violation of LSA-R.S. 40:966 A. The defendant waived his right to trial by jury and elected to be tried by judge alone. The trial court found the defendant guilty as charged and imposed a sentence of five years at hard labor with the Louisiana Department of Corrections.

The defendant failed to perfect any assignments of error as required by LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 844. The defendant's assignment of error was first made in brief to this court and therefore cannot be considered on appeal. State v. Zeno, 322 So.2d 136 (La. 1975); State v. Spears, 350 So.2d 603 (La. 1977). We are limited to a review of the record for errors that are discoverable by a mere inspection of the pleadings and proceedings, and without inspection of the evidence. LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 920; State v. Jackson, 332 So.2d 211 (La. 1976); State v. Gerald, 325 So.2d 574 (La. 1976). We have reviewed the record and find no error.

Accordingly, the defendant's conviction and sentence are affirmed.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

State v. Melbert

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit
Oct 12, 1983
438 So. 2d 1292 (La. Ct. App. 1983)
Case details for

State v. Melbert

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF LOUISIANA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. LOUIS J. MELBERT…

Court:Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit

Date published: Oct 12, 1983

Citations

438 So. 2d 1292 (La. Ct. App. 1983)

Citing Cases

State v. Finley

Defendant asserts by this assignment that the sentence was excessive. Defendant failed to perfect this…