Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Rice, 807 So. 2d 350.

15 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Kyron A. Theophile La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
App. 4 Cir. 1/16/02), ) (citations omitted).
State v. Ladd 192 So. 3d 235 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
4 Cir. 1/16/02), (sentence unconstitutional if it make no measurable contribution to the acceptable goals of punishment and imposes disproportionate pain and suffering), and State ex rel.
State v. Sims 123 So. 3d 806 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 1/16/02), -355 (district court did have “the judicial powers” to consider a sentence other than life imprisonment and it was error for district court not to do so upon defendant’s request); see also State v. Green, 10-0008, p. 9 (La.App.
State v. Chaplain 114 So. 3d 1274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Landfair 70 So. 3d 1061 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 1/16/02), , this court reviewed the nature of the habitual felony offender sentencing scheme and the standard for departing from it: Even though a sentence under the Habitual Offender Law is the minimum provided by that statute, the sentence may still be unconstitutionally excessive if it makes no measurable contribution t
State v. Hall 64 So. 3d 339 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 1/16/02), , this Court reviewed the standard for ex-cessiveness of a mandatory life sentence imposed on a defendant convicted of simple possession of cocaine and sentenced as a multiple offender: Even though a sentence under the Habitual Offender Law is the minimum provided by that statute, the sentence may still be uncons
State v. Phillips 61 So. 3d 130 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 1/16/02), , this court reviewed the nature of the habitual felony offender sentencing scheme and the standard for departing from it: Even though a sentence under the Habitual Offender Law is the minimum provided by that statute, the sentence may still be unconstitutionally excessive *135 if it makes no measurable contribut
State v. Green 52 So. 3d 253 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
4 Cir. 1/16/02) , , this court discussed the mandatory nature of the habitual felony offender sentencing scheme and the discretion that remains with the district court in such matters: Even though a sentence under the Habitual Offender Law is the minimum provided by that statute, the sentence may still be unconstitutionally excessive i
State v. Lawrence 47 So. 3d 1003 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Zachary 995 So. 2d 631 La. 2008
App. 5th Cir.1998) (life sentence for third offense robbery found excessive), (La.App.
State v. Williams 932 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
App. 4 Cir. 1/16/02), , where this Court remanded the cases for resen-tencing because the trial court judges had indicated that they had no alternative but to impose life sentences.
State v. Houston 859 So. 2d 707 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
4 Cir. 1/16/02) , writ denied, XXXX-XXXX (La.9/13/02), , this Court discussed the relationship between the mandatory nature of the sentencing *711 scheme in La.
State v. Combs 848 So. 2d 672 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
App. 4 Cir. 1/16/02), , writ denied, XXXX-XXXX (La.9/13/02), , this Court reviewed the nature of the habitual felony offender sentencing scheme and the standard for departing therefrom: Even though a sentence under the Habitual Offender Law is the minimum provided by that statute, the sentence may still be unconstitutio
State v. Wilson 839 So. 2d 206 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
State v. Everidge 834 So. 2d 1197 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
4 Cir. 1/16/02), , writ denied, 2002-0513 (La.9/13/02), , this court held that it was error for a trial court to refuse to consider a Dorthey reduction of the statutory mandatory life sentence, stating that the enactment of Act 403 was a “signal that our legislature desired to revisit harsh sentencing in our state ....