DocketNumber: No. JAK 08-1428
Citation Numbers: 11 So. 3d 2
Judges: Cooks, Gremillion, Painter
Filed Date: 3/4/2009
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
| Nlie State of Louisiana has filed seven applications for appellate review of a ruling on five Defendants’ motions to recuse the Honorable J.P. Mauffray, Jr. from presiding over their trials. The five Defendants are those individuals otherwise known as the “Jena Six.”
One of the Defendants in this case is a juvenile, J.R.B.
|2Because this matter is moot, we will dismiss these appeals without reaching their substance. There are only two facts relevant to our ruling.
First, LaSalle Parish has elected a new judge. This court takes judicial notice of the Louisiana Secretary of State’s “Elected Official Database.” State v. Carpenter, 00-436 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/18/2000), 772 So.2d 200 and La.Code Evid. art. 201. That publication indicates that: 1) Judge J.P. Mauffray, Jr.’s term of office ended on December 31, 2008; 2) The current judge for Louisiana’s 28th Judicial District is the Honorable J. Christopher Peters; and, 3) Judge Peters’ term of office ends on December 31, 2014.
Second, the “Jena Six” have a new judge. On August 4, 2008, following Judge Yeager’s grant of Defendants’ motions to recuse Judge Mauffray, the Louisiana Supreme Court signed an order, as follows:
Judge Thomas M. Yeager, Division “B”, Ninth Judicial District Court, Parish of Rapides, be and he is hereby assigned as judge ad hoc of the Twenty-Eighth Judicial District Court, Parish of LaSalle, for the purpose of hearing and disposing of the matters entitled “State of Louisiana vs. Theodore R. Shaw” No. 82,017; “State of Louisiana vs. Robert Bailey,” No. 82,014; “State of Louisiana vs. Carwin Jones,” No. 82,015; “State of Louisiana vs. Bryant Ray Purvis,” No. 82,016; and “State of Louisiana In the Interest of [J.R.B.],” No. J-3855, 3856, and 3868 on the docket of said court, subject to the completion of any unfinished business.
Based on the current circumstances, Judge Mauffray will no longer preside over any matter related to the “Jena Six.”
APPEALS DISMISSED.
. Pursuant to Uniform Rules — Courts of Appeal, Rule 5-2, we use initials to protect the identity of the juvenile.
. Defendants point out that Judge Mauffray has suggested the possibility that he could be appointed ad hoc to complete all matters related to the "Jena Six." However, based on the current and standing order issued by the supreme court, Judge Yeager is the ad hoc judge. If the supreme court later rescinds its appoinlment of Judge Yeager, Judge Peters will have jurisdiction unless and until he re-cuses himself or is recused. The possibility of an ad hoc appointment for Judge Mauffray is mere speculation that this court will not consider.