Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Sepulvado, 367 So. 2d 762.
- State v. Juluke 374 So. 2d 1259 La. 1979
- State v. Spencer 374 So. 2d 1195 La. 1979
- State v. Touchet 372 So. 2d 1184 La. 1979
- State v. Franks 373 So. 2d 1307 La. 1979
- State v. Martin 372 So. 2d 563 La. 1979
- State v. Jacobs 371 So. 2d 727 La. 1979
-
State v. Gist
369 So. 2d 1339
La. 1979
we held 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. Smith 369 So. 2d 136 La. 1979
-
State v. Terriault
369 So. 2d 125
La. 1979
Accordingly, we held that "the imposition of a sentence, although within the statutory limit, may violate defendant's constitutional right against excessive punishment that is enforceable by this court on appellate review of his conviction."
-
State v. Cox
369 So. 2d 118
La. 1979
In accordance therewith, we held 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. Volk
369 So. 2d 128
La. 1979
[5] we held that excessiveness is a question of law reviewable under our appellate jurisdiction.
-
State v. Songy
367 So. 2d 1178
La. 1979
a majority of this Court, interpreting Article 1, Section 20 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974, held 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 c