DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Daranda, 398 So. 2d 1053.

18 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Scott Robert Swank La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
    (a case where the supreme court upheld a concurrent sentence of three years for each victim where the defendant, who had no prior record, killed a seventeen-year-old couple in another vehicle while driving under the influence); (a five-year sentence at hard labor was not excessive punishment for a first offender found guilty of a single count of negligent homicide); State v. Knight, 45,231 (La.App.
  • State v. Becnel 250 So. 3d 1207 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    Further, in State v. Daranda , (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Jeffery Neal Deville La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    See, State v. Wilcoxon, 26,126 (La.App.
  • State v. DEVILLE 74 So. 3d 774 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    See, State v. Wilcoxon, 26,126 (La.App.
  • State v. LeBlanc 41 So. 3d 1168 La. 2010
    See, State v. Wilcoxon, 26,126 (La.App.
  • State v. Bailey 457 So. 2d 94 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
    Insofar as the length of the sentence, (La.
  • State v. Walker 454 So. 2d 1256 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
    While maximum sentences are reserved for the most blameworthy and egregious of offenders in a particular class [ ] and consecutive sentences for crimes arising from a single course of conduct require particular justification [], the sentencing judge’s reasons and the record justify this sentencing choice.
  • State v. Ransome 441 So. 2d 425 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Green 443 So. 2d 531 La. 1983
    State v. Sepulvado, supra
  • State v. Gray 434 So. 2d 447 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Smith 430 So. 2d 801 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
  • State v. Dirden 430 So. 2d 798 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
    Having instituted the appellate review of a sentence for excessiveness, (1981), concluded that in addition to Article 894.1 being the guideline to follow in sentencing a convicted defendant, compliance with the provisions by the trial court was an important aid to the appellate courts when called upon to review a sentence complained of as excessive under this constitutional provision.
  • State v. Thomas 428 So. 2d 950 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Barrios 425 So. 2d 980 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
    which states that the trial judge's reasons for the sentence imposed are the proper bases for review of a sentence alleged to be excessive.
  • State v. Hayes 423 So. 2d 1111 La. 1982
    Of the final disposition of the plea bargain question, [3] we said at : If the new evidence supports the finding that defendant's plea of guilty was induced in part by a promise by the state of probation, or no jail or prison time, the plea bargain must be enforced.
  • State v. Quebedeaux 424 So. 2d 1009 La. 1982
  • State v. Green 418 So. 2d 609 La. 1982
    the defendant's car spun out of control during a rainstorm and crashed into an oncoming vehicle.
  • State v. Reed 409 So. 2d 266 La. 1982
    State v. Sepulvado, supra