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. Sepulvado, 367 So. 2d 762.

1912 citing documents.

  • State v. Dickerson 446 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Coghlan 446 So. 2d 808 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Talley 446 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Smith 445 So. 2d 156 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Rogers 445 So. 2d 174 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
    LSA-Const., Art. 1, § 20
  • State v. Pickens 445 So. 2d 159 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
    Further, as to determining what is excessive punishment under the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, decided that the imposition of a sentence, even though within the statutory limits, may be unconstitutionally excessive in violation of Article 1, Section 20 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974.
  • State v. Grigsby 445 So. 2d 176 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Lewis 445 So. 2d 195 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
    the Louisiana Supreme Court determined that the imposition of a sentence, although within the statutory limit, may violate a defendant's constitutional right against excessive punishment that is enforceable on appellate review of his conviction.
  • State v. Adams 446 So. 2d 355 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
    [2] the Louisiana Supreme Court decided that the imposition of a sentence even though within the statutory limits may be unconstitutionally excessive in violation of Article 1, Section 20 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974.
  • State v. Gordon 444 So. 2d 1188 La. 1984
  • State v. Goodson 444 So. 2d 1337 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Bridges 444 So. 2d 721 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
    As authority for this two-pronged argument
  • State v. Freeman 444 So. 2d 243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Danos 444 So. 2d 1269 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Shields 444 So. 2d 287 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Chaney 444 So. 2d 266 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Hutchinson 444 So. 2d 352 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Gatson 441 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Smithey 441 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
  • State v. Doucet 443 So. 2d 777 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
    [5] the Louisiana Supreme Court decided that the imposition of a sentence, even though within the statutory limits, may be unconstitutionally excessive in violation of Article 1, § 20 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974.
  • State v. Lathers 444 So. 2d 96 La. 1983
    In accordance, therewith, we held that "the imposition of a sentence, although within the statutory limit, may violate a defendant's constitutional right against excessive punishment that is enforceable by this court on appellate review of his conviction."
  • State v. Roberson 445 So. 2d 12 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
    the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that "the imposition of a sentence, although within the statutory limit, may violate a defendant's constitutional rights against excessive punishment that is enforceable by this Court on appellate review of his conviction."
  • State v. Johnson 443 So. 2d 744 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
  • State v. Barousse 442 So. 2d 1220 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
  • State v. Hunter 441 So. 2d 434 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Sweeney 443 So. 2d 522 La. 1983
  • State v. Green 443 So. 2d 531 La. 1983
  • State v. Edwards 442 So. 2d 689 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Allen 442 So. 2d 737 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    held that a sentence, although within statutory limits, may still violate a defendant’s constitutional right against excessive punishment.
  • State v. Brown 440 So. 2d 994 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Jones 441 So. 2d 423 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    the Supreme Court held that a sentence may be excessive even though it is within the statutory limits.
  • State v. Granier 442 So. 2d 1162 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
    LSA-Const., Art. 1, § 20
  • State v. Bannister 441 So. 2d 334 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    Louisiana Constitution, Article 1, Section 20; (La.App.
  • State v. Sonnier 441 So. 2d 359 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
    State v. Sepulvado, supra, [ (La.
  • State v. Guin 444 So. 2d 625 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Johnson 440 So. 2d 838 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Freeze 438 So. 2d 1340 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Shelby 438 So. 2d 1166 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
    In support of these assignments, which chose to interpret Article 1, Section 20 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974 [2] in such a manner that a sentence imposed within the statutory guidelines is, nevertheless, deemed to be reviewable on appeal for excessiveness.
  • State v. Brown 438 So. 2d 1202 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Huntley 438 So. 2d 1188 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
    the Louisiana Supreme Court decided that the imposition of a sentence, even though within the statutory limits, may be unconstitutionally excessive in violation of Article 1, Section 20 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974.
  • State v. Ourso 438 So. 2d 1239 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Maxie 438 So. 2d 1199 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Stone 438 So. 2d 1245 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Remedies 438 So. 2d 1248 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Francois 438 So. 2d 1317 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    However, the Louisiana Supreme Court has held that a sentence imposed within statutory limits may nevertheless be reviewed for excessiveness, and that LSA-C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Stoner 438 So. 2d 1275 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Moss 438 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Capdeville 438 So. 2d 1310 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Pyron 438 So. 2d 1183 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
    [1] the Louisiana Supreme Court determined that the imposition of a sentence, although within the statutory limit, may violate a defendant's constitutional right against excessive punishment that is enforceable on appellate review of his conviction.
  • State v. Stroud 438 So. 2d 1172 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
    State v. McDonald, supra; (La.