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. Humphrey, 445 So. 2d 1155.

177 citing documents.

  • State v. Wilson 99 So. 3d 1067 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    The pertinent question on appellate review is “whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.” see also | ¿State v. Taves, 03-0518, p. 4 (La.12/3/03), (per cu-riam) (collecting cases).
  • State v. Savoy 93 So. 3d 1279 La. 2012
    State v. Walker, 00-3200, p. 2 (La.10/12/01), ; State v. Cook, 95-2784, p. 3 (La.5/31/96)
  • State v. Colvin 85 So. 3d 663 La. 2012
    The pertinent question on appellate review is “whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropri *668 ate.” see also State v. Taves, 03-0518, p. 4 (La.12/3/03), (per curiam)(collecting cases).
  • State v. Martin 72 So. 3d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    In State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: *937 On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), (), cert.
  • State v. Scoggins 70 So. 3d 145 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    In State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), (), cert.
  • State v. Stanfield 56 So. 3d 428 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    In State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), (), ce rt.
  • State v. Cox 48 So. 3d 275 La. 2010
  • State of Louisiana v. Deanna Gaspard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State v. Gaspard 49 So. 3d 971 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State of Louisiana v. Daniel L. Pegues La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State v. Pegues 43 So. 3d 1008 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), (), cert.
  • State v. Johnson 41 So. 3d 1188 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    In reviewing a claim that a sentence is excessive, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), (); State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), .
  • State v. CASSIMERE 34 So. 3d 954 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
    In State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), (), cert.
  • State v. Negron 25 So. 3d 249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    2d 49, 50 (per curiam) ( (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. John Prince La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • State v. Major 1 So. 3d 715 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    In reviewing a claim that a sentence is excessive, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), ().
  • State v. Colbert 990 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
    In a one-paragraph per curiam, the Court stated: On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), ( (La.
  • State v. Lay 986 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    10/9/98), (per curiam) ( (La.
  • State v. Dunbar 981 So. 2d 51 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
    In State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), , the Court stated: On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), ( (La.
  • State v. Cozzetto 974 So. 2d 665 La. 2008
    ("On review of the excessiveness claims, the only question is whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more *667 appropriate.") (citation omitted); cf. La.
  • State v. Williams 969 So. 2d 1251 La. 2007
    615 , 136 L.Ed.2d 539 (1996)); (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Frederick James Collette La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    [is] ‘whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.’ ” State v. Robinson, 05-633, p. 8 (La.App.
  • State v. Franklin 956 So. 2d 823 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
    State v. Legrand, supra , State v. Weatherspoon, supra .
  • State v. Blank 955 So. 2d 90 La. 2007
    Moreover, this Court has held that polygraph information and test results are inadmissible "`either as substantive evidence or as relating to the credibility of a party or witness.'" (quoting State v. Tonubbee, supra at 132 ).
  • State v. Brown 956 So. 2d 53 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
  • State of Louisiana v. Clayton James Greene La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    [is] ‘whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.’ ” State v. Robinson, 05-633, p. 8 (La.App.
  • State v. Allen 954 So. 2d 779 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
    In State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), ( (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Albert Stevens, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    [is] ‘whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.’ ” State v. Robinson, 05-633, p. 8 (La.App.
  • State v. Stevens 949 So. 2d 597 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
  • State v. Weatherspoon 948 So. 2d 215 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    [35] State v. Legrand, supra at 98 , (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. John Thompson, III La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    [is] ‘whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.’ ” State v. Robinson, 05-633, p. 8 (La.App.
  • State v. Thompson 943 So. 2d 621 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
  • State of Louisiana v. Nicodemus L. Hebert La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    [is] ‘whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.’ ” State v. Robinson, 05-633, p. 8 (La.App.
  • State v. Williams 932 So. 2d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    Additionally, in State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), , the Supreme Court stated: On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), (), cert.
  • State v. Smith 922 So. 2d 639 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
  • State v. Robinson 918 So. 2d 1151 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
  • State of Louisiana v. Billy Ray Robinson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    [is] ‘whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.’ ” At sentencing, the trial court observed that Defendant had five prior felonies and discussed several factors outlined in La.Code Crim.P.
  • State v. Scott 927 So. 2d 441 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    On appellate review of a sentence, the relevant question is “ ‘whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.” ’ State v. Thomas, 98-1144, pp. 1-2 (La.10/9/98), (per curiam)
  • State of Louisiana v. Darwin Gauthier La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    17 136 L.Ed.2d 539 (1996), the Louisiana Supreme Court held: The only relevant question on review, however, was “whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.” ().
  • State v. Gauthier 916 So. 2d 314 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
  • State v. Martin 911 So. 2d 917 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
  • State of Louisiana v. David Lee Leger La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    Moreover, this Court has held that polygraph information and test results are inadmissible “either as substantive evidence or as relating to the credibility of a party or witness.” (quoting Tonubbee, supra at 132).
  • State v. Leger 907 So. 2d 739 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    (quoting Tonubbee, supra at 132 ).
  • State v. Major 898 So. 2d 548 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
  • State of Louisiana v. Arthur Major III La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    615, 136 L.Ed.2d 539 (1996), the Louisiana Supreme Court held: The only relevant question on review, however, was “whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.” ().
  • State v. Bertrand 891 So. 2d 752 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    In State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), (), cert.
  • State v. Onstead 875 So. 2d 908 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
  • State v. Landry 871 So. 2d 1235 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
    In State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appellate review of sentence, the only 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 (La.5/31/96), ( (La.
  • State v. Legrand 864 So. 2d 89 La. 2004
    (quoting Tonubbee, supra at 132 ).
  • State v. JTS 865 So. 2d 1032 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004