Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Morris, 918 So. 2d 1107.

16 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Donald Alan Crooks La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
3 Cir. 12/30/05), (alteration in original) (quoting State v. Salat, 95-72, p. 5 (La.App.
State of Louisiana v. Edward Garriet, III La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
3 Cir. 12/30/05), wherein it found that “[t]he trial court imposed indeterminate sentences because it suspended the sentences and placed Defendant on five years of supervised probation without specifying to which count or counts the probation applied.” In Morris, the court quoted fro
State of Louisiana v. Brian L. Pope La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
3 Cir. 12/30/05), -14, this court discussed a similar issue: The trial court imposed indeterminate sentences because it suspended the sentences and placed Defendant on five years of supervised probation without specifying to which count or counts the probation applied.
State of Louisiana v. Michael Calvin Duhon -Aka- Michael C. Duhon -Aka- Michael Duhon La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
3 Cir. 12/30/05), wherein it found that “[t]he trial court imposed indeterminate sentences because it suspended the sentences and placed Defendant on five years of supervised probation without specifying to which count or counts the probation applied.” In Morris, the court quoted fro
State of Louisiana v. Jeremy Morris Ervin La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
3 Cir. 12/30/05), wherein it 3 found that “[t]he trial court imposed indeterminate sentences because it suspended the sentences and placed Defendant on five years of supervised probation without specifying to which count or counts the probation applied.” In Morris
State v. Ervin 258 So. 3d 677 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
3 Cir. 12/30/05), , 1113, wherein it found that "[t]he trial court imposed indeterminate sentences because it suspended the sentences and placed Defendant on five years of supervised probation without specifying to which count or counts the probation applied."
State of Louisiana v. Catrina L. Wallace La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
State v. Wallace 153 So. 3d 1040 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Bourgeois 113 So. 3d 225 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
3d Cir. 12/30/05), -13 (conviction and sentence for filing false public records vacated and set aside because the defendant "merely contacted police, but did not actually file or deposit for record any document in any public office or with any public official.”).
State v. Ricard 102 So. 3d 236 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
3 Cir. 12/30/05) , , Mr. Ricard argues on appeal that the trial court correctly quashed Count Three of the bill of information because the conduct of which he is accused (providing false information to the police) falls within the ambit of La.
State of Louisiana v. Brian A. Verret La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
3 Cir. 12/30/05), wherein it found that “[t]he trial court imposed indeterminate sentences because it suspended the sentences and placed Defendant on five years of supervised probation without specifying to which count or counts the probation applied.” In Morris, the court quoted from State v. Taylor, 01-680
State v. Verret 9 So. 3d 1112 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
3 Cir. 12/30/05), , wherein it found that “[t]he trial court imposed indeterminate sentences because it suspended the sentences and placed Defendant on five years of supervised probation without specifying to which count or counts the probation applied.” In Morris, , the court quoted from State v. Taylor, 01-680, p
State v. LOUVIER 983 So. 2d 1031 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
3 Cir. 12/30/05) , , we found the trial court imposed indeterminate sentences because it failed to specify on which count or counts the defendant was placed on probation.
State of Louisiana v. J. M. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. JM 941 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. J.M. 941 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006