Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Bradley, 414 So. 2d 724.
-
State of Louisiana v. Michael R. Suydam, Jr.
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
The jurisprudence is well settled that “[t]he trial judge is given great discretion in the imposition of sentences 27 within statutory limits, and the sentence should not be set aside in the absence of abuse of his discretion.” (citations omitted).
-
State of Louisiana v. Joseph Matthew Pardue A/K/A Joseph Matthews Pardue
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
Further, when evaluating sentences given to defendants for similar crimes, it must be acknowledged that “[t]he trial judge is given great discretion in the imposition of sentences within statutory limits, and the sentence should not be set aside in the absence of abuse of his discretion.” (citations omitted).
-
State of Louisiana v. Robert Eugene Vascocu
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
Even evaluating sentences given to defendants for similar crimes, our jurisprudence acknowledges that “[t]he trial judge is given great discretion in the imposition of sentences within statutory limits, and the sentence should not be set aside in the absence of abuse of his discretion.” (citations omitted), and the relevant question is “‘whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.’” State v. Cook, 95-2784, p. 3 (L
-
State of Louisiana v. Rosalyn Faith Breaux
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
When evaluating sentences given to defendants for similar crimes, we acknowledge that “[t]he trial judge is given great discretion in the imposition of sentences within statutory limits, and the sentence should not be set aside in the absence of abuse of his discretion.”
-
State v. Sims
106 So. 3d 709
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See *715 Square, 433 So.2d at 110
- State v. Roberts 588 So. 2d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
- State v. Minor 580 So. 2d 975 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
- State v. Welch 550 So. 2d 265 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
- State v. James 545 So. 2d 560 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
- State v. Foster 541 So. 2d 238 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
- State v. Michaels 516 So. 2d 202 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
- State v. Bunch 510 So. 2d 1266 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
- State v. Gray 502 So. 2d 1114 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
- State v. Shelton 490 So. 2d 515 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
- State v. Pruitt 474 So. 2d 491 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
- State v. Pruitt 474 So. 2d 491 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
- State v. Williams 467 So. 2d 1293 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
- State v. Hayes 466 So. 2d 767 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
- State v. Santee 464 So. 2d 922 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
- State v. Williams 458 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
-
State v. Casimier
454 So. 2d 1199
La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
State v. Socco, supra; State v. Telsee, supra
-
State v. Willis
452 So. 2d 796
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
894.1 if he adequately considers the guidelines in particularizing sentence to the defendant.”
- State v. Gaines 452 So. 2d 239 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
- State v. Deville 451 So. 2d 129 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
- State v. Nelson 449 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
- State v. Williams 446 So. 2d 565 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
-
State v. Palmer
447 So. 2d 1159
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Sepulvado and Goodman, supra
- State v. Thomas 447 So. 2d 1053 La. 1984
-
State v. Adams
446 So. 2d 355
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Sepulvado and Goodman, supra
- State v. Doucet 443 So. 2d 777 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
- State v. Bannister 441 So. 2d 334 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
-
State v. Shelby
438 So. 2d 1166
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
Sepulvado and Goodman, supra
-
State v. Huntley
438 So. 2d 1188
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
Sepulvado and Goodman, supra
-
State v. Pyron
438 So. 2d 1183
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
Sepulvado and Goodman, supra
- State v. Hammonds 434 So. 2d 452 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
- State v. Square 433 So. 2d 104 La. 1983
- State v. Cunningham 431 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
- State v. Brooks 431 So. 2d 865 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
-
State v. Robinson
423 So. 2d 1053
La. 1982
See, in which insufficiency of the evidence was not an issue.