# State v. Brown

> Supreme Court of Louisiana · February 28, 2014 · 145 So. 3d 236

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4813519

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE of Louisiana v. Kenneth BROWN
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Louisiana
- **Decided:** February 28, 2014
- **Citations:** 145 So. 3d 236; 2014 La. LEXIS 697; 2014 WL 814585
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Hughes
- **Judges:** Hughes
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4813519

## Opinion text

HUGHES, J.,
concurring.
Iil concur with the denial of the writ, not because the defendant is engaged in a “fishing expedition,” but because the subpoena at issue is not properly to be used as a discovery device.
Far from being a fishing expedition, a dash cam -video may well be the best evidence of the defendant’s stop and arrest, and the state may wish to introduce it against the defendant at trial.
But La. C. Cr. P. art. 732 only refers to the production of things “at a hearing or trial.” As it appears that no hearing on a motion to suppress or trial date has been set, defendant’s request for a subpoena duces tecum is premature.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4813519. Public record. Not legal advice.