Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Diaz, 615 So. 2d 1336.

21 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Calvin Evan Anderson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
the court held: The district court may not impose a suspended sentence and require the defendant to spend additional time in jail as a condition of probation if the overall effect of the sentence is to expose the defendant to a greater term of imprisonment than provided
State v. Epperley 176 So. 3d 726 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Epperley 151 So. 3d 721 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State of Louisiana v. Kenneth Wayne Randolph La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
the court held that the trial court ―may not impose a suspended sentence and require the defendant to spend additional time in jail as a condition of probation if the 3 overall effect of the sentence is to expose the defendant to a greater term of impris
State ex rel. K.J. 71 So. 3d 557 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
art. 895.1 B(5) authorizes the court to order payment “to the victim to compensate him for his loss and inconvenience,” which amount may be in addition to the amounts ordered under Article 895.1
State Ex Rel. Kj 71 So. 3d 557 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2011
art. 895.1 B(5) authorizes the court to order payment "to the victim to compensate him for his loss and inconvenience," which amount may be in addition to the amounts ordered under Article 895.1
State v. Green 28 So. 3d 1105 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. PORTIE 22 So. 3d 213 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
where we find the initial guidance to ferret out this issue of payment of restitution.
State v. Yates 15 So. 3d 1260 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
after conviction of second degree battery, the defendant was sentenced to serve five years at hard labor (the maximum sentence).
State of Louisiana v. Brandy Smith La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
the supreme court addressed the payment of restitution, stating: 6 La.Code Crim.Proc.
State v. Smith 6 So. 3d 309 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
the supreme court addressed the payment of restitution, stating: La.Code Crim.Proc.
State of Louisiana v. Fay v. Perez, III La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
the supreme court addressed the payment of restitution, stating: La.Code Crim.Proc.
State v. Perez 966 So. 2d 813 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
the supreme court addressed the payment of restitution, stating: La.Code Crim.Proc.
State v. Fortier 862 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
the Supreme Court explained that article 895.1 is not to be used to provide criminal sanctions to collect civil damages, but rather is to be used to compensate the victim for pecuniary losses caused by the criminal activity of the defendant.
State v. Devare 860 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
Distinguished State v. Dixon 839 So. 2d 1141 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
in which the supreme court held, "The district court may not impose a suspended sentence and require the defendant to spend additional time in jail as a condition of probation if the overall effect of the sentence is to expose the defendant to a greater term of imprisonment than provided by the statut
State v. Brack 758 So. 2d 310 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
App. 3 Cir. 12/26/96); , this court, found such a sentence to be illegally excessive, stating "a district court may not impose a suspended sentence and require the defendant to spend additional time in jail as a condition of probation if the overall effect is to expose the defendant to a greater term of imprisonment than provided by the statut
State v. Sanderson 715 So. 2d 483 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
State v. Alexander 687 So. 2d 527 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
the Louisiana Supreme Court held that a district court may not impose a suspended sentence and require the defendant to spend additional time in jail as a condition of probation if the overall effect is to expose the defendant to a greater term of imprisonment than provided by the statute violated.
State v. Becnel 674 So. 2d 959 La. 1996
which holds that “a district court may not impose a suspended sentence and require the defendant to spend additional time in jail as a condition of probation if the overall effect of the sentence is to expose the defendant to a greater term of imprisonment than provided by the statute he violated.” We
State v. Brown 645 So. 2d 1282 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994