Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Jones, 522 So. 2d 560.

15 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. David Billy Parker, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2025
5 Cir. 1987), writ denied, the court explained, “The purpose of requiring the defendant’s presence at sentencing and of pronouncing the sentence in open court is to insure the defendant is apprised o
State of Louisiana v. George Joseph La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
5 Cir. 1987), writ denied, the court explained, “The purpose of requiring the defendant’s presence at sentencing and of pronouncing the sentence in open court is to insure the defendant is apprised of the punishment imposed, See C.Cr.P.
State of Louisiana v. Stacy Tyrone Johnson, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
5 Cir. 1987), writ denied, the court explained, “The purpose of requiring the defendant’s presence at sentencing and of pronouncing the sentence in open court is to insure the defendant is apprised of the punishment imposed, See C.Cr.P.
State of Louisiana v. McKartney Young La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
5 Cir. 1987), writ denied, (La.
State v. Young 271 So. 3d 422 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
5 Cir. 1987), writ denied , overruled on other grounds by State v. Monk , the court explained, "The purpose of requiring the defendant's presence at sentencing and of pronouncing the sentence in open court is to insure the defendant is apprised of the punishment imposed.
STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS PRESTON KINCHEN AKA STEVEN HALL AKA STEVEN WEBB La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
5 Cir. 1987), writ denied, the court explained: “The purpose of requiring the defendant’s presence at sentencing and of pronouncing the sentence in open court is to insure the defendant is apprised of the punishment imposed, See C.Cr.P.
State v. Kinchen 71 So. 3d 344 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
5 Cir.1987), writ denied, the court explained: “The purpose of requiring the defendant’s presence at sentencing and of pronouncing the sentence in open court is to insure the defendant is apprised of the punishment imposed, See C.Cr.P.
State of Louisiana v. Thomas Eaglin AKA Eaglin Thomas AKA Thomas H. Eaglin La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
5 Cir. 1987), writ denied, the court explained, “The purpose of requiring the defendant’s presence at sentencing and of pronouncing the sentence in open court is to insure the defendant is apprised of the punishment imposed, See C.Cr.P.
State v. Dunn 769 So. 2d 673 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
5th Cir., 1987), writ denied
State v. Perkins 762 So. 2d 67 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
5th Cir.1987); writ denied
State v. Scamardo 708 So. 2d 1126 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
App. 5th Cir., 1987), writ denied
State v. Edwards 537 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
5 Cir.1987), writ denied
State v. Will 536 So. 2d 601 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
5th Cir.1987), writ denied, (La.
State v. Thomason 531 So. 2d 1177 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
5th Cir.1987), writ denied (La.App.
State v. Schroder 527 So. 2d 439 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
5 Cir.1987), writ denied (La.App.