Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Foster, 834 So. 2d 1188.

16 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Charles Penn La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2026
State of Louisiana Versus Antonio Dante Key La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
App. 4 Cir. 12/11/02), approvingly cited in Kisack, supra.
State of Louisiana v. Jobey S. Bienemy La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
App. 4 Cir. 12/11/02), (citing State v. Pierre, 99-3156, p. 7 (La.
State of Louisiana v. Vernon Holden A/K/A Vernon Demtrius Holden, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
App. 4 Cir. 12/11/02), (“A defendant may implicitly waive the twenty-four hour delay by announcing his readiness for sentencing.”), the waivers under the circumstances presented in those decisions are typically not so much 5 implicit as expressly made (by announcing that def
State of Louisiana v. Gerald Samuel La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
App. 4 Cir. 12/11/02), (“A defendant may implicitly waive the twenty-four hour delay by announcing his readiness for sentencing.”), the waivers under the circumstances presented in those decisions are typically not so much implicit as expressly made (by announcing that defendant is ready to be sentenced) withou
State of Louisiana v. Keith C. Kisack 236 So. 3d 1201 La. 2017
App. 4 Cir. 12/11/02), (“A defendant may implicitly waive the twenty-four hour delay by announcing his readiness for sentencing.”), the waivers under the circumstances presented in those decisions are typically not so much implicit as expressly made (by announcing that defendant is ready to be sentenced) without being as fully articulat
State of Louisiana v. Danial Lewayne Lafleur -Aka- Daniel Lafleur -Aka- Daniel Lee Lafleur -Aka- Danial Lafleur La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
4 Cir. 12/11/02), the defendant alleged his sentence was excessive because the trial court did not consider his mental illness as a mitigating factor when sentencing him.
State v. Lafleur 209 So. 3d 927 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
4 Cir. 12/11/02) , , the defendant alleged his sentence was excessive because the trial court did not consider his mental illness as a mitigating factor when sentencing him.
State v. Castro 206 So. 3d 1059 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Pollard 165 So. 3d 289 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 12/11/02), ; State v. Pieire, 99-3156, p. 7 (La.App.
State v. Jasper 149 So. 3d 1239 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 12/11/02), ) (finding failure to observe twenty-four-hour delay was harmless error when almost two months elapsed between the defendant’s conviction and sentencing and the defendant did not show prejudice); see State v. Jefferson, 97-2949, pp. 5-6 (La.App.
State v. Jordan 145 So. 3d 388 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Wilson 138 So. 3d 661 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Agee 990 So. 2d 95 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
State v. Stovall 977 So. 2d 1074 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
4 Cir. 12/11/02), , this Court discussed exceptions to the requirement that sentences be vacated and the cases remanded for resentencing where the failure to observe the twenty-four hour delay is considered harmless: [F]ailure to observe the twenty-four hour period has been considered harmless where there is a sufficient delay be
State v. Davis 859 So. 2d 776 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
4 Cir. 12/11/02), , this Court recognized that there are exceptions to the requirement of mandatory delays in cases where the failure to observe the delays is considered harmless error.