Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Paoli, 818 So. 2d 795.

13 citing documents.

State v. Duhon 270 So. 3d 597 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 1st Cir. 4/11/02), , 799-800, writ denied , 2002-2137 (La.
State v. Lampley 265 So. 3d 799 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 1st Cir. 4/11/02), , 799-00, writ denied , 2002-2137 (La.
State v. Holden 32 So. 3d 803 La. 2010
1st Cir.4/11/04), (same), writ denied 02-2137 (La.2/21/03), ; see also Com.
Overruled State v. Price 952 So. 2d 112 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
App. 1st Cir.4/11/02), -800 (en banc), writ denied, 2002-2137 (La.2/21/03), .
State v. Brumfield 944 So. 2d 588 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
App. 1st Cir.4/11/02), -800 (en banc), writ denied, 02-2137 (La.2/21/03), .
State v. Morgan 943 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
1st Cir.4/11/02), -800 (en banc), writ denied, 2002-2137 (La.2/21/03), , this court recognized that Williams represented a clear departure from the earlier prohibition against an appellate court taking steps to correct an illegally lenient sentence noted as patent sentencing error.
State v. Jones 907 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
1st Cir.4/11/02), -800 (en banc), writ denied, 2002-2137 (La.2/21/03), .
State v. Brooks 882 So. 2d 724 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
1st Cir.4/11/02), , writ denied, 02-2137 (La.2/21/03), , complained that he was given a single Boykinization for two separate bills of information on predicate offenses and argued that only one guilty plea was entered and it was not addressed to a specific charge.
State v. Williams 859 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
1 Cir. 4/11/02), -01 (Guidry, J., dissenting)(noting that while State v. Williams, 00-1725 (La.11/28/01), , it did not overrule Fraser and expressing his view that Williams is inapplicable to sentencing errors of a type different than those subject to a
State v. Brown 849 So. 2d 566 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
1 Cir. 4/11/02), (en banc), writ denied, 2002-2137 (La.2/21/03), .
State v. Comena 843 So. 2d 464 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
1 Cir. 4/11/02), -01 (Guidry, J., dissenting); as Guidry, joined by Judge Pettigrew, aptly stated: Although State v. Williams, 00-1725 (La.11/28/01), , it does not overrule Fraser; and I do not interpret Williams as applicable to
State v. Davis 834 So. 2d 1170 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
1 Cir. 4/11/02), -01 (Guidry, J., dissenting); as Judge Guidry, joined by Judge Pettigrew, aptly stated: Although State v. Williams, 00-1725 (La.11/28/01), , it does not overrule Fraser and I do not interpret Williams as applicab
State v. Major 829 So. 2d 625 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
1 Cir. 4/11/02), -01 (Guidry, J., dissenting); as Judge Guidry, joined by Judge Pettigrew, aptly stated: |7Although State v. Williams, 00-1725 (La.11/28/01), , it does not overrule Fraser and I do not interpret Williams as applic