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. Sherer, 437 So. 2d 276.

102 citing documents.

  • State v. Gay 830 So. 2d 356 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    4th Cir.1987); and the potential for defendant’s rehabilitation, (La.App.
  • State v. Washington 828 So. 2d 97 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    4th Cir.1987); and the potential for defendant's rehabilitation, (La.App.
  • State v. Washington 828 So. 2d 97 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    4th Cir.1987); and the potential for defendant’s rehabilitation, (La.App.
  • State v. Johnson 806 So. 2d 960 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
  • State v. Walker 775 So. 2d 484 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
    4th Cir.1987); the potential for the defendant's rehabilitation, (La.App.
  • State v. Coleman 756 So. 2d 1218 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    4th Cir.1987); the potential for the defendant's rehabilitation, (La.App.
  • State v. Kunzman 741 So. 2d 112 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
    State v. Honeyman, supra ; on appeal after remand, (La.App.
  • State v. Stacy 686 So. 2d 949 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
    4th Cir.1987); the potential for rehabilitation, State v. Lighten, supra; and whether the defendant received a benefit from a plea bargain, State v. Jett, supra.
  • State v. Smith 651 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
    4th Cir.1987), the potential for defendant's rehabilitation, Lighten, supra, and whether defendant has received a benefit from a plea bargain, Jett, supra ; Adams, supra .
  • State v. Kennedy 631 So. 2d 1195 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
  • State v. Barker 628 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
  • State v. Jeter 609 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
    on appeal after remand, cert dismissed, 468 U.S. 1205 , 104 S.Ct.
  • State v. Strother 606 So. 2d 891 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
  • State v. Barnes 597 So. 2d 1109 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
    on appeal after remand, State v. Trosclair, supra, at p. 1105 .
  • State v. Lindsey 583 So. 2d 1200 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
  • State v. English 582 So. 2d 1358 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
  • State v. Jackson 575 So. 2d 940 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
  • State v. Delaune 572 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
  • State v. Hunt 568 So. 2d 1104 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
  • State v. Honeyman 565 So. 2d 961 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
    on appeal after remand, State v. Trosclair, supra, at p. 1105 .
  • State v. White 552 So. 2d 553 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
    the court stated: “Because the function of the consecutive sentence should be similar to the sentence imposed on habitual or dangerous offenders, sentences arising from a single course of conduct should be concurrent rather than consecutive, absent a showing that the offender poses an unusual risk to the sa
  • State v. Carter 552 So. 2d 490 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
  • State v. Jackson 552 So. 2d 445 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
    1983); and the potential for rehabilitation
  • State v. Washington 550 So. 2d 287 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    1st Cir.1983); the potential for defendant’s rehabilitation, and the danger posed by the defendant to the public safety
  • State v. Restrepo 544 So. 2d 512 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1989
  • State v. Nelson 543 So. 2d 1058 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER 6 Defendant contends that at the sentencing hearing, appeal after remand
  • State v. Davenport 520 So. 2d 463 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
  • State v. Brown 517 So. 2d 359 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    Although a case is ordinarily remanded for resentencing when a trial court fails to state its basis for the sentence imposed, a remand for more complete compliance with L.S.A.-C.Cr.Proc.
  • State v. Broadhurst 517 So. 2d 382 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • State v. Lighten 516 So. 2d 1266 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
  • State v. Hupp 514 So. 2d 271 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
  • State v. Patrick 513 So. 2d 449 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
  • State v. Berthelot 513 So. 2d 1228 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
  • State v. Duvio 511 So. 2d 821 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
  • State v. Falls 508 So. 2d 1021 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
  • State v. Gibson 505 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
  • State v. Gordon 504 So. 2d 1135 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
    Although a case is ordinarily remanded for resentencing when a trial court fails to state its basis for the sentence imposed, a remand for more complete compliance with L.S.A.-C.Cr.Proc.
  • State v. Parker 503 So. 2d 643 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1987
    1st Cir.1983); the potential for defendant's rehabilitation, and the danger posed by the defendant to the public safety
  • State v. Dorsey 498 So. 2d 95 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • State v. Williams 499 So. 2d 142 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • State v. Reed 499 So. 2d 132 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
    the court stated: "Because the function of the consecutive sentence should be similar to the sentence imposed on habitual or dangerous offenders, sentences for crimes arising from a single course of conduct should be concurrent rather than consecutive, absent a showing that the offender poses an unusual ris
  • State v. Jacobs 493 So. 2d 766 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • State v. Gaudin 493 So. 2d 234 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
  • State v. Racine 480 So. 2d 945 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
    the court stated: Because the function of the consecutive sentence should be similar to the sentence imposed on habitual or dangerous offenders, sentences for crimes arising from a single course of conduct should be concurrent rather than consecutive, absent a showing that the offender poses an unusual risk
  • State v. Tomlin 478 So. 2d 622 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
  • State v. Camps 476 So. 2d 864 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
    the court stated: Because the function of the consecutive sentence should be similar to the sentence imposed on habitual or dangerous offenders, sentences for crimes arising from a single course of conduct should be concurrent rather than consecutive, absent a showing that the offender poses an unusual risk
  • 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. McGhee 469 So. 2d 1051 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
    the court stated: Because the function of the consecutive sentence should be similar to the sentence imposed on habitual or dangerous offenders, sentences for crimes arising from a single course of conduct should be concurrent rather than consecutive, absent a showing that the offender poses an unusual risk
  • State v. Mosley 466 So. 2d 733 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985