Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Dorthey, 623 So. 2d 1276.

2014 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Eddie Hilliard, Jr. La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State of Louisiana v. Rodriqus Harris La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State Of Louisiana v. Timothy Lee Elliott La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
Later, he states that the trial court gave no reason for why it doubled his twenty-year term - " a term that itself rises to the level of constitutional excessiveness given this offense and this offender[.]" - 81 ( La.
State of Louisiana v. Frin Wayne Coward La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
State of Louisiana v. Daniel Heath Kight La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
State v. Kight 275 So. 3d 26 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
State v. Martin 273 So. 3d 578 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Jones 273 So. 3d 585 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Kennon 273 So. 3d 611 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
He requests that his 60-year sentence be reviewed for constitutional excessiveness pursuant to State v. Dorthey , (La.
State of Louisiana v. McKartney Young La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
State v. Young 271 So. 3d 422 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
3/4/98), , and State v. Dorthey
State v. Flores 268 So. 3d 1199 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
1/14/03), ; State v. Dorthey , (La.
State v. Hopkins 268 So. 3d 1226 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Williams 268 So. 3d 1241 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Jackson 268 So. 3d 1217 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Mathis 268 So. 3d 1160 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
She also argued that under State v. Dorthey , (La.
State of Louisiana v. Shelton Broadway La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
“ ‘[T]he excessiveness of a sentence becomes a question of law reviewable under the appellate jurisdiction of this court.’ ” ().
State v. Gaines 266 So. 3d 948 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
1/14/03), ; State v. Dorthey , (La.
State v. Harris 266 So. 3d 953 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Davis 265 So. 3d 1194 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Washington 266 So. 3d 430 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Travis 265 So. 3d 854 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
CONST. art. I, § 20, and State v. Dorthey , (La.
State v. Torrence 265 So. 3d 1022 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
9/10/93), (explaining that because the multiple offender hearing is not a trial, legal principles such as double jeopardy do not apply).
State v. Payne 262 So. 3d 498 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Lyles 263 So. 3d 930 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER TWO In his second assignment of error, defendant argues in the alternative that his sentence of life imprisonment is unconstitutionally excessive under State v. Dorthey , (La.
State v. Turner 259 So. 3d 1089 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
1974) ; see also , State v. Dorthey , , 1279 (La.
State v. Thompson 259 So. 3d 1257 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2018
State v. Dorthey , , 1280-81 (La.
State v. Edden 259 So. 3d 1196 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State v. Efferson 259 So. 3d 1153 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
10/18/17), ; State v. Dorthey , (La.
State v. Clark 259 So. 3d 1178 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
Habitual Offender Proceeding and Errors Patent In his third assignment of error, Clark asserts that the trial court erred in failing to fully justify on the record why it found clear and convincing evidence that he deserved relief under *1189 State v. Dorthey , (La.
State v. Manson 259 So. 3d 1172 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State v. Allen 260 So. 3d 703 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State v. Lewis 260 So. 3d 1220 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State v. Roth 260 So. 3d 1230 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
He submits that he was entitled to a downward department from the mandatory minimum pursuant to State v. Dorthey , (La.
State v. Dorsey 260 So. 3d 616 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
3/15/17), , 831 : Thus, if a defendant believes that the state has abused its professional discretion in filing a habitual offender bill such that it seeks to impose an unconstitutionally excessive sentence, the defendant should move the court at the sentencing hearing to depart downward from the mandatory minimum as permitted by State v. Dorthey , (La.
State of Louisiana v. Adrian A. Dorsey A/K/A Adrian Anton Dorsey La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
Thus, if a defendant believes that the state has abused its professional discretion in filing a habitual offender bill such that it seeks to impose an unconstitutionally excessive sentence, (La.
State v. Wilson 255 So. 3d 551 La. 2018
However, as we found in State v. Dorthey , , 1280-81 (La.
State v. Smith 258 So. 3d 973 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
15:574.4(E), instead of imposing an individualized sentence and allowing the defendant an opportunity to develop a record for alternative sentencing under State v. Dorthey , (La.
State of Louisiana v. Roderick Jermaine Cawthorne, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
the supreme court stated that the trial courts should abide by the legislatively mandated sentences unless such 5 sentences are unconstitutional.
State v. Cawthorne 257 So. 3d 717 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
In State v. Dorthey , the supreme court stated that the trial courts should abide by the legislatively mandated sentences unless such sentences are unconstitutional.
State v. Minor 254 So. 3d 1278 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
2d 1 ; State v. Dorthey , (La.
State v. Vaughn 259 So. 3d 1048 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Livous 259 So. 3d 1036 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Weaver , 805 So.2d at 174 ; State v. Dorthey , , 1280 (La.
State v. Hunter 252 So. 3d 1053 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Dorthey , , 1280 (La.
State v. Little 252 So. 3d 1038 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State v. Willis 253 So. 3d 915 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State v. Smart 254 So. 3d 28 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State v. Nixon 254 So. 3d 1228 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State v. Liker 250 So. 3d 1105 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State v. Austin 250 So. 3d 1147 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018