DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Sugasti, 820 So. 2d 518.

189 citing documents.

  • State v. Peden 875 So. 2d 934 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    [20] State v. Sugasti, 01-3407, p. 5 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Simmons 875 So. 2d 1018 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407, p. 5 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Sarrio 875 So. 2d 898 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407, p. 5 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Packnett 873 So. 2d 789 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Parker 871 So. 2d 317 La. 2004
    Although the court acknowledged *319 that State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), , reiterated this court's consistent holding that the law in effect at the time of the commission of the offense is determinative of the penalty which the convicted defendant must suffer, the majority distinguished the instant situation on several grounds.
  • State v. Pierre 869 So. 2d 206 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. Barnes, 02-2059 (La.4/4/03), ; State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Williams 862 So. 2d 108 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    In reaching this decision, the First Circuit first differentiated their case from the Louisiana Supreme Court's decision in State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), , and analogized Parker's situation to the one in State v. Mayeux, 01-3195 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Brown 861 So. 2d 644 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    [25] 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Parent 860 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    In State v. Sugasti, 01-3407, p. 7 (La.6/21/02), -522 , the Louisiana Supreme Court commented on the effect of Act 403 on the sentencing of a defendant charged with possession of heroin: There is a strong presumption against retroactivity of statutes.
  • State v. Chisley 860 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Houston 859 So. 2d 707 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    State v. Mayeux, 01-3408, p. 2-3 (La.6/21/02), -26 ; State v. Sugasti, 01-3407, p. 6-7 (La.6/21/02), -22 .
  • State v. Bates 853 So. 2d 71 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407, p. 4 (La.6/21/02), ; Accord, State v. Barnes, 02-2059 (La.4/4/03), .
  • State v. White 850 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02)
  • State v. Moore 847 So. 2d 97 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    State v. Sugasti, 2001-3407 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Heredia 847 So. 2d 17 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), ; State v. Cook 02-104 (La.App.
  • State v. Orange 845 So. 2d 570 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), , and the cases therein relied upon, did not deal with a habitual offender adjudication.
  • State v. Barnes 845 So. 2d 354 La. 2003
    State v. Mayeux, 01-3408, p. 2-3 (La.6/21/02), -26 ; State v. Sugasti, 01-3407, p. 6-7 (La.6/21/02), -22 .
  • State v. Parker 845 So. 2d 546 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    [3] In State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), , the Louisiana Supreme Court examined whether the provisions of 2001 La.
  • State v. Schieffler 841 So. 2d 1000 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. B.A.S 838 So. 2d 155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    2001-3407, p. 4 (La.6/21/02); .
  • State v. Day 838 So. 2d 74 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    In State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), , the defendant was sentenced to five years imprisonment for possession of heroin and alprazolam, and six months in parish jail for possession of marijuana, with a fine, court costs, and commission fees.
  • State v. Guilbeau 838 So. 2d 160 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    Furthermore, in State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02); , the Louisiana Supreme Court referenced the legislative pronouncement of Section 6 of Act 403 and observed that, while the trial court should consider the new sentencing provision in imposing sentence, "the trial judge should not derogate from the penalty provision in effect at the time of the commission of the offen
  • State v. Hardy 836 So. 2d 1249 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    State v. Sugasti, 2001-3407 (La.6/21/02), ; State v. Drane, supra.
  • State v. Simmons 839 So. 2d 239 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    In State v. Sugasti, 01-3407(La.6/21/02), , the Louisiana Supreme Court held that Act 403's amendment to the penalty provision of La.
  • State v. Harris 839 So. 2d 291 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407(La.6/21/02), -522 (footnotes omitted).
  • State v. Wilson 839 So. 2d 206 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    In State v. Sugasti, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/21/02), , the court reaffirmed its long held position that a defendant must be sentenced according to the sentencing provisions in effect at the time of the commission of the crime.
  • State v. Wilson 833 So. 2d 560 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    Although this provision could be interpreted to apply the Act to all sentences imposed after its effective date of June 15, 2001, the supreme court did not endorse this interpretation in State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02); .
  • State v. Sanders 836 So. 2d 263 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    This principle was recently reaffirmed by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02) .
  • State v. Odle 834 So. 2d 483 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    In a recent supreme court case, State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02); , the court addressed the very issue raised by Shaw, that is, "whether legislative changes reducing sentencing provisions for certain offenses should be applied to offenses committed prior to the effective date of the statute when the defendant is sentenced following the effective date of the changes."
  • State v. Perkins 831 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    In State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), , the Louisiana Supreme Court confirmed the prospective nature of Act 403.
  • State v. Robinson 831 So. 2d 460 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    In State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/01), , the Louisiana Supreme Court addressed this issue and stated: Although the trial judge should consider the ameliorative changes in the law in imposing sentence, the trial judge should not derogate from the penalty provision in effect at the time of the commission of the offense.
  • State v. Neal 830 So. 2d 408 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    See also State v. Sugasti, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/21/02), , and State v. Melancon, XXXX-XXXX (La.
  • State v. Wade 832 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    See, e.g., State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), ; State v. Keith, 35,644 (La.App.
  • State v. Bagneris 830 So. 2d 1047 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    14:98(E) to a conviction obtained after effective date when the defendant committed the offense before effective date), State v. Sugasti, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/21/02), , (applying 2001 amendment to LSA-R.S.
  • State v. Drane 828 So. 2d 107 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02)
  • State v. Melancon 826 So. 2d 633 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    State v. Sugasti, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/21/02), ; State v. Mayeux, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/21/02), ; State v. Serpas, XXXX-XXXX (La.App.
  • State v. Warren 824 So. 2d 508 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    (Footnotes omitted) State v. Sugasti 2001-3407, p. 6 (La.6/21/02), .
  • State v. Mayeux 820 So. 2d 524 La. 2002
  • State v. Mayeux 820 So. 2d 526 La. 2002
    State v. Sugasti, 01-3407 (La.6/21/02), ; State v. Wayne Mayeux, 01-3408 (La.6/21/02), .