Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. LeCompte, 406 So. 2d 1300.

43 citing documents.

State Of Louisiana v. William Wayne Lee, Jr. La. 2023
1981) (describing pardons as an “issue entrusted only to the governor and Board of Pardons.”); (La.
State ex rel. Esteen v. State 239 So. 3d 266 La. 2018
Esteen , 16-0949 at 4, 239 So.3d at 236 ; see also State v. LeCompte , , 1307 (La.1981) (noting the constitution's "exclusive grant to the governor of the power to reduce or commute sentences after the execution of the sentence begins.").
State of Louisiana v. Asahel Harvin La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
State of Louisiana v. Adam Comeaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
State v. Harvin 239 So. 3d 907 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. LeCompte , , 1311 (La.1981) (on rehearing).
State v. Comeaux 239 So. 3d 920 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. LeCompte , , 1311 (La.1981) (on rehearing).
State of Louisiana v. Asa Bentley AKA - Asa N. Bentley La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
State v. Shondel, 22 Utah 2d 343, 453 P.2d 146 (1969); (on original hearing).
State v. Bentley 185 So. 3d 254 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Shondel, 22 Utah 2d 343 , 453 P.2d 146 (1969); (on original hearing).
State v. Rochon 75 So. 3d 876 La. 2011
State v. Interiano, 03-1760, p. 4 (La.2/13/04); ().
State of Louisiana v. Henrietta Williams La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Williams 953 So. 2d 91 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. Wilbert Rideau La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
The legislature is presumed not to intend to enact an unconstitutional statute.” (La.
State v. Rideau 943 So. 2d 559 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. Cunningham 903 So. 2d 1110 La. 2005
State v. Interiano, 03-1760, p. 4 (La.2/13/04), ; State v. LeCompte, on reh'g
State v. Interiano 868 So. 2d 9 La. 2004
State v. Taylor 769 So. 2d 535 La. 2000
[2] As such, the statute is *540 which involved a post-conviction sentencing procedure, a function reserved exclusively to the judicial branch.
Hunter v. Tensas Nursing Home 738 So. 2d 27 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
In Re Succession of Grimmett 738 So. 2d 27 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Richards 713 So. 2d 514 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
State v. Rome 696 So. 2d 976 La. 1997
State v. Dorthey 623 So. 2d 1276 La. 1993
State v. Williams 620 So. 2d 475 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
State v. Piazza 596 So. 2d 817 La. 1992
State v. Shondel, 22 Utah 2d 343 , 453 P.2d 146 (1969); (on original hearing).
Distinguished State v. Flournoy 591 So. 2d 1303 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
In support of his argument that the statute in question is unconstitutional
State v. Rahaim 579 So. 2d 989 La. 1991
State v. Martinez 560 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
State v. Briggs 526 So. 2d 297 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
2d 110 (La.1978); reversed on rehearing on other grounds.
State v. Perez 516 So. 2d 199 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
the Supreme Court held that the portion of R.S.
State v. Gonzales 515 So. 2d 819 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
guilt or imposition of sentence shall not be suspended, deferred, or withheld, nor shall such person be eligible for probation or parole prior to serving the minimum sentences provided by Subsections E and/or F. After the defendant's criminal conduct occurred, that portion of the statute which provides for a (La.
State v. Hernandez 513 So. 2d 312 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
However, the Louisiana Supreme Court declared that portion of the penal provision of LSA-R.S.
State v. Laino 499 So. 2d 1189 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
on rehearing; appeal after remand (La.App.
State v. Merchant 490 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
State v. Camps 476 So. 2d 864 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
40:967 F(2) as justified by the serious nature of the crime.
State v. Green 476 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
State v. Bueno 473 So. 2d 372 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
the Supreme Court of Louisiana, in finding G(2) constitutional, stated: “...
State v. Salgado 473 So. 2d 84 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
However, our supreme court held that a portion of the penal provisions of Revised Statute 40:967(E) and (F) governing possession of large amounts of marijuana and cocaine is unconstitutional insofar as it provides for a minimum fine with no maximum fine.
State v. Clark 467 So. 2d 602 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Clark 466 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
is on point which holds to the contrary.
State v. Diaz 461 So. 2d 1099 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
the court declared that portion of the penal provision relating to fines unconstitutional.
State v. Liuzza 457 So. 2d 664 La. 1984
upheld the constitutionality of the word "substantial" as used in LSA-R.S.
State v. Howard 448 So. 2d 150 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Manuel 426 So. 2d 140 La. 1983
(on rehearing); (on rehearing).
State v. Bing 410 So. 2d 227 La. 1982