From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Marcantel

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Sep 10, 1980
388 So. 2d 383 (La. 1980)

Summary

In State v. Marcantel, 388 So.2d 383 (La. 1980), the supreme court held that defendants, who were charged with crimes punishable with or without hard labor, could not be tried before a jury of twelve persons, but had to be tried before a six-person jury.

Summary of this case from State v. Authement

Opinion

No. 66985.

September 10, 1980.

APPEAL FROM 13TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF EVANGELINE, STATE OF LOUISIANA, HONORABLE JOSEPH E. COREIL, J.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., William Pucheu, Dist. Atty., A. Bruce Rozas and Richard W. Vidrine, Asst. Dist. Attys., for plaintiff-appellee.

Guy O. Mitchell, Ville Platte, for Steve Marcantel, defendant-appellant.

John Saunders, Ville Platte, for Delouis Guillory, defendant-appellant.


Defendants Steve Marcantel and Delouis Guillory were charged by bill of information with the crimes of simple burglary, La.R.S. 14:62, and theft, La.R.S. 14:67, committed on November 6, 1978. Thereafter, they were tried before a twelve person jury, which found them guilty as charged. The trial court sentenced each defendant to serve ten years at hard labor on the burglary charge and six years at hard labor on the theft charge, the sentences to run consecutively. Defendants now appeal, relying upon eight assignments of error. Because we find merit to assignment of error number four, relative to the improper composition of the jury, we pretermit consideration of the remainder.

Article I, Section 17 of the 1974 Louisiana Constitution provides that "[a] case in which the punishment may be confinement at hard labor or confinement without hard labor for more than six months shall be tried before a jury of six persons . . ." See also, La.C.Cr.P. Art. 782.

Both crimes with which these defendants were charged were punishable with or without hard labor, La.R.S. 14:62 and La.R.S. 14:67; consequently by constitutional mandate, they were triable before a six person jury. For the reasons assigned in State v. Smith, 367 So.2d 857 (La. 1979), defendants' convictions and sentences are reversed, and the case is remanded to the district court for a new trial.

REVERSED.

DENNIS and LEMMON, JJ. dissent. See State v. Nedds, 364 So.2d 588 (La.) (Dissenting opinion).


Summaries of

State v. Marcantel

Supreme Court of Louisiana
Sep 10, 1980
388 So. 2d 383 (La. 1980)

In State v. Marcantel, 388 So.2d 383 (La. 1980), the supreme court held that defendants, who were charged with crimes punishable with or without hard labor, could not be tried before a jury of twelve persons, but had to be tried before a six-person jury.

Summary of this case from State v. Authement
Case details for

State v. Marcantel

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF LOUISIANA v. STEVE MARCANTEL AND DELOUIS GUILLORY

Court:Supreme Court of Louisiana

Date published: Sep 10, 1980

Citations

388 So. 2d 383 (La. 1980)

Citing Cases

State v. Prater

Therefore, the case must be reversed and remanded to the trial court for a new trial. This rule was…

State v. Pollard

Applying this constitutional mandate, the Supreme Court has consistently held that the verdict returned by a…