Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Broussard, 416 So. 2d 109.

51 citing documents.

State Of Louisiana v. Glen Thompkins La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
State v. Ellis 190 So. 3d 354 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
the delay in filing the multiple bill was thirteen months after the defendant’s original sentence.
State v. Richardson 155 So. 3d 87 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
wherein the Court held that a thirteen-month delay in filing a habitual offender bill of information was unreasonable.
State v. Stanfield 137 So. 3d 788 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
the Louisiana Supreme Court noted that although La.
State of Louisiana v. Ernest D'Wayne Derryberry La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
However, given the fact that the rule adopted in [State v.] McQueen [] and [State v.] Broussard[, ] is based on the requirement of La.Code Crim.P.
State of Louisiana v. Marcus Quinn, Sr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
in support of his argument.
State v. Quinn 38 So. 3d 1102 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
in support of his argument.
State v. Zachary 995 So. 2d 631 La. 2008
State v. Severin 985 So. 2d 277 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
State v. Carter, 32,733, p. 1 (La.App.
State v. Dauzart 960 So. 2d 1079 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
-111 (La.1982); State v. Anderson, 01-158 (La.App.
State v. Muhammad 875 So. 2d 45 La. 2004
State v. Fisher 852 So. 2d 1075 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Toney 842 So. 2d 1083 La. 2003
State v. Burks 843 So. 2d 444 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
the Louisiana Supreme Court noted that although La.
Distinguished State v. Wilson 833 So. 2d 560 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
The *569 case cited by Defendant, is distinguishable.
State v. Perkins 811 So. 2d 997 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
State v. Anderson 788 So. 2d 561 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
-111 (La.1982); State v. Conrad, 94-232 (La.App.
State v. Grimes 786 So. 2d 876 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
the Louisiana Supreme Court noted that although La.
State v. Johnson 783 So. 2d 520 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
State v. Bass 767 So. 2d 772 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
in which the Louisiana Supreme Court held that a habitual offender bill must be filed within a reasonable amount of time after the State becomes aware of the defendant's prior felony record because a defendant is entitled to know the full consequences of the verdict within a reasonable time.
State v. McNeal 765 So. 2d 1113 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
The statute does not contain a prescriptive period; but, the Supreme Court held that a multiple bill must be filed within a reasonable time after the State becomes aware of the defendant's prior felony record.
State v. Ball 748 So. 2d 1239 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Metoyer 748 So. 2d 1174 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
in deciding whether to again move forward on the habitual offender bill or to simply impose sentence on the defendant for the aggravated escape conviction.
State v. Carter 746 So. 2d 711 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Walker 735 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
the Supreme Court noted that although La.
State v. Taylor 719 So. 2d 75 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
State v. Ward 712 So. 2d 139 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
Although the statute does not contain a prescriptive period, the Supreme Court, held that a habitual offender bill must be filed within a reasonable time after the State becomes aware of the defendant's prior felony record.
State v. Langlois 695 So. 2d 540 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
State v. Page 680 So. 2d 700 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
the Supreme Court noted that although Revised Statute 15:529.1 does not provide a time limitation, a multiple bill must be filed within a reasonable time after the State learns that a defendant has a prior felony conviction.
State v. Morris 645 So. 2d 1295 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Although the statute does not contain a prescriptive period, the Louisiana Supreme Court, held that a habitual offender bill must be filed "within a reasonable time" after the prosecution becomes aware of the defendant's prior felony record.
State v. Conrad 646 So. 2d 1062 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
State v. Carter 630 So. 2d 926 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
State v. Gaynard 629 So. 2d 1242 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. Williams 620 So. 2d 475 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
State v. Ryan 619 So. 2d 537 La. 1993
State v. Moore 619 So. 2d 537 La. 1993
18 , (1950); cf., State v. Bell, 324 *
State v. Thornton 599 So. 2d 919 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Bravo 597 So. 2d 105 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Williams 596 So. 2d 399 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
the Court noted that although R.S.
State v. Smith 591 So. 2d 413 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
State v. Roberts 588 So. 2d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
State v. Noel 585 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
State v. Wheeler 576 So. 2d 541 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Frisard 566 So. 2d 169 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Ross 542 So. 2d 631 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1989
the Supreme Court of Louisiana held that the district attorney must file an habitual offender bill within a "reasonable time" after the prosecution knows that a defendant has a prior felony record.
State v. Thompson 539 So. 2d 1008 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Abraham 521 So. 2d 511 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
State v. Burch 490 So. 2d 552 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
the State filed a multiple bill thirteen months after sentence and three months prior to the date the defendant was eligible for parole.
State v. Bell 471 So. 2d 1190 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
defendant argues that he had a right to know the full consequences of his conviction within a reasonable time, and that the proceedings to sentence under the enhancement of penalty provisions were unduly delayed, resulting in a divestiture of the sentencing power of the trial court.
State v. Patterson 459 So. 2d 714 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984