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. Augustine, 555 So. 2d 1331.

179 citing documents.

  • State v. Alexander 871 So. 2d 483 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    In State v. Smith, 01-2574, p. 6 (La.1/14/03), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that sentences of 35 to 50 years have been found to be acceptable for first offenders convicted of armed robbery, and State v. Thomas, 98-1144, p. 2 (La.10/9/98), .
  • Overruled State v. Gibson 867 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that the trial courts failure to observe the twenty-four hour delay did not constitute harmless error even where the defendant failed to raise that issue on appeal.
  • State v. Hartwell 866 So. 2d 899 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
  • State v. Brown 868 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
  • Overruled State v. Williams 863 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that the trial court’s failure to observe the twenty-four hour delay did not constitute harmless error even where the defendant failed to raise that issue on appeal.
  • State v. Davis 859 So. 2d 776 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    superseded, in part, by statute as stated in State v. Martin, 93-1915 (La.
  • State v. Lebreton 859 So. 2d 785 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    superseded, in part, by statute as stated in State v. Martin, 93-1915, pp. 2-3 (La.App.
  • State v. Smith 839 So. 2d 1 La. 2003
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144, p. 2 (La.10/9/98), ; and the cases cited therein.
  • State v. Foster 834 So. 2d 1188 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    superseded, in part, by statute as stated in State v. Martin, 93-1915, pp. 2-3 (La.App.
  • State v. Coleman 828 So. 2d 1130 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    | the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay voided the defendant’s sentence if the defendant attacks his sentence, even if the defendant fails to specifically allege this failure as an error on appeal.
  • State v. Drane 828 So. 2d 107 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
  • Overruled State v. Willis 823 So. 2d 1072 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
  • State v. Jason 820 So. 2d 1286 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
  • State v. Rodriguez 822 So. 2d 121 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
  • State v. Marcotte 817 So. 2d 1245 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    In Dronet , even though we could not find any prejudice as a result of the trial court's failure to observe the delay in sentencing, we noted the strict application of Article 873 and remanded the case for resentencing because the defendant challenged his sentence on appeal.
  • State v. Burbank 811 So. 2d 1112 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
  • State v. Parker 812 So. 2d 86 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    [12] See, State v. Alexander, 98-993 (La.
  • State v. Williams 815 So. 2d 908 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
  • State v. Denham 804 So. 2d 929 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
  • State v. Magee 809 So. 2d 452 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    -34 (La.1990),; the Supreme Court held that a trial court's failure to observe the twenty-four hour delay is not harmless error if the defendant challenges the sentence on appeal.
  • State v. Holmes 791 So. 2d 669 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay voided the defendant's sentence if the defendant attacks his sentence, even though the defendant fails to specifically allege this failure as an error on appeal.
  • State v. Brown 788 So. 2d 694 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    State v. Richardson, 00-134 (La.App.
  • State v. Hebert 787 So. 2d 1041 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay voided the defendant's sentence, if the defendant attacks his sentence, although the defendant fails to specifically allege this failure as an error on appeal.
  • State v. Brauner 782 So. 2d 52 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Shaw 785 So. 2d 34 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Johnson 775 So. 2d 670 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
  • State v. Coates 774 So. 2d 1223 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    -1335 (La.1990), the Louisiana Supreme Court implied that a failure to observe the twenty-four hour delay provided in article 873 will be considered harmless error where the defendant could not show that he suffered prejudice from the violation.
  • State v. Pleasant 772 So. 2d 910 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
    See, (Remand for resentencing due to the failure to observe the mandatory twenty-four hour delay was not a useless formality where reimposition might result in a lesser sentence).
  • State v. Schmidt 771 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
    In Dronet, even though we could not find any prejudice as a result of the trial court's failure to observe the delay in sentencing, we noted the strict application of Article 873 and remanded the case for resentencing because the defendant challenged his sentence on appeal.
  • State v. Bullock 766 So. 2d 585 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
  • State v. Hayden 767 So. 2d 732 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
  • State v. Harris 761 So. 2d 662 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay voided the defendant' sentence if the defendant attacks his sentence, even though the defendant fails to specifically allege this failure as an error on appeal.
  • State v. Duncan 761 So. 2d 586 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay voided the defendant's sentence if the defendant attacks his sentence, even though the defendant fails to specifically allege this failure as an error on appeal.
  • State v. Sam 761 So. 2d 72 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
  • State v. Lindsey 758 So. 2d 916 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay voided the defendant’s sentence if the defendant attacks his sentence, even though the defendant fails to specifically allege this failure as an error on appeal.
  • State v. Sartain 746 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay voided the defendant's sentence if the defendant attacks his sentence, even though the defendant fails to specifically allege this failure as an error on appeal.
  • State v. East 745 So. 2d 812 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
  • State v. Bowers 746 So. 2d 82 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    the Louisiana Supreme Court found that a prison term of forty years for an eighteen year old first offender convicted of armed robbery was not constitutionally excessive.
  • State v. Wilson 742 So. 2d 957 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that the trial court's failure to observe the delay provisions was not harmless, when the defendant appealed his sentence as being excessive even though the defendant's sentence was not unconstitutionally excessive, reasoning that: There is no assurance that this is a `usele
  • State v. Taylor 735 So. 2d 908 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    where the Court held that the failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay could not be considered harmless if the defendant challenges his sentence on appeal.
  • State v. Jefferson 735 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay voided the defendant's sentence if the defendant attacks his sentence, even though the defendant fails to specifically allege this failure as an error on appeal.
  • State v. Hicks 733 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    and State v. Bowers, 97-1029 (La.App.
  • State v. McGhee 739 So. 2d 222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay voided defendant’s sentence if defendant attacks his sentence, even though defendant fails to specifically allege this failure as an error on appeal.
  • State v. Alexander 734 So. 2d 43 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    a defendant contended that his forty-year sentence for an armed robbery conviction was excessive and also asserted that the trial judge failed to observe the delay in article 873.
  • State v. Reyes 726 So. 2d 84 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
    1558 , 137 L.Ed.2d 705 (1997); and State v. Bowers, 97-1029 (La.
  • State v. Dronet 721 So. 2d 1038 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
  • State v. Norfleet 721 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
    the Louisiana Supreme Court held that failure to waive the twenty-four hour delay did not constitute harmless error, even if the defendant did not raise that issue as error on appeal, where the defendant challenged his sentence on appeal.
  • State v. Bilbo 719 So. 2d 1134 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
    Nevertheless, -1334 (La.
  • State v. Bowers 712 So. 2d 302 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
    the defendant did challenge his sentence on appeal and cited the trial court's failure to observe the 24-hour delay.
  • State v. Williams 708 So. 2d 1086 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998