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. Boowell, 406 So. 2d 213.

39 citing documents.

  • State Of Louisiana v. Mitch Bratton La. 2025
  • State of Louisiana Versus Raymond H Kimble III La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2024
  • State of Louisiana v. Jason L. Thomas La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
    3 Cir. 11/2/11), the supreme court held that only the first year of a sentence imposed for simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling may be without the benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
  • State of Louisiana v. Randy Lee Turner La. 2019
  • State v. Ordon 259 So. 3d 620 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    In State v. Boowell , , 215-16 (La.
  • State v. Tucker 237 So. 3d 1176 La. 2018
    1991) ; State v. Boowell , , 216 (La.
  • State v. Capers 211 So. 3d 589 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
    14:62.2 provides, in pertinent part: “Whoever commits the crime of simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than one year, without the benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence, nor more than twelve years.” (La.
  • State v. Ellis 161 So. 3d 64 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    the defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling and was sentenced on each count to three years at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, with the sentences to run concurrently.
  • State v. Herrington 152 So. 3d 202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    14:62.2 provides that a person convicted of simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling “shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than one year, without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence, nor more than twelve years.” held that due to the ambiguity.
  • State of Louisiana v. Tony E. Washington La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    the supreme court held that only the first year of a sentence imposed for simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling may be without the benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
  • State v. Washington 76 So. 3d 1264 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
  • State of Louisiana v. Kevin Paul Jacobs La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State v. Jacobs 48 So. 3d 1218 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Parker 845 So. 2d 546 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
  • State Ex Rel. Lewis v. State 685 So. 2d 131 La. 1997
    9/3/96), ; cf. State ex rel.
  • State ex rel. Lewis v. State 685 So. 2d 131 La. 1997
    9/3/96), ; cf. State ex rel.
  • State v. King 639 So. 2d 1231 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
  • State v. Corry 610 So. 2d 142 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
  • State v. Martin 599 So. 2d 422 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
  • State v. Lubrano 550 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    The defendant argues that the rule of lenity in statutory construction applies so that the lesser punishment should be imposed
  • State v. Jones 532 So. 2d 369 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
  • State v. Hardan 519 So. 2d 224 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
  • State v. Nora 520 So. 2d 916 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    14:62.2 in pertinent part provides: “Whoever commits the crime of simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than one year, without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence, nor more than twelve years.” interpreted this provision to mean that only the first year of the sentence is to be served without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
  • State v. Wright 506 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    The Louisiana Supreme Court, expressly determined that the ineligibility portion of this statute applied only to the minimum one year term.
  • State v. Hardan 501 So. 2d 848 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
  • State v. Wilder 499 So. 2d 432 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • State v. Anderson 499 So. 2d 140 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • Distinguished State v. Goodly 487 So. 2d 1280 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    The defendant’s is misplaced.
  • State v. Reed 482 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • State v. Hayes 476 So. 2d 870 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
  • State v. Harris 470 So. 2d 601 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
  • State ex rel. Thomas v. Hood 466 So. 2d 1296 La. 1985
  • State v. Liuzza 457 So. 2d 664 La. 1984
  • State v. Smith 448 So. 2d 778 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
    was called upon to interpret a similar provision in La.R.S.
  • State v. Glasper 446 So. 2d 911 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Ogletree 446 So. 2d 415 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
  • State v. Pemberton 442 So. 2d 440 La. 1983
  • State v. Sprinkle 439 So. 2d 1230 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
  • State v. Conley 411 So. 2d 448 La. 1982
    this Court accepted the defendant's contention that the ineligibility provision should attach only to the statute's minimum one-year term.