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. Soraparu, 703 So. 2d 608.

111 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Cedrick Stroughter La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2025
  • State Of Louisiana v. Brandt Anthony Bennett La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
    10/ 13/ 97), ( per curiam) ( finding maximum sentence of forty years for manslaughter imposed on twenty- one- year- old' defendant appropriate where facts justified a verdict of second- degree murder); State v. Lambert, 2009- 1223 ( La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Frederick Curtis Mangrum La. 2024
  • State of Louisiana v. Douglas Paul James La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
  • State of Louisiana v. Jaiden Kephart La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
  • State of Lousisiana Versus Hoang M. Le La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
  • State of Louisiana v. David Paul Monceaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
  • State of Louisiana Versus George Cepriano, Jr. La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2022
  • State Of Louisiana v. Noe A. Aguliar-benitez Aka Noe Aguilar-benitez La. 2021
    ’” State v. Soraparu, 97 -1027 (La.10/13/97), (quoting State v. Sepulvado, 367 So.2d at 767)).
  • State of Louisiana v. Tashonty C Toney La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2021
  • State of Louisiana v. Curtis Roy Williams La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2021
    Const. art. I, § 20, i.e., when it imposes ‘punishment disproportionate to the offense.” ’ State v. Soraparu, 97- 1027 (La.10/13/97), ().
  • State of Louisiana Versus Roy R. Dixon La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2019
  • State of Louisiana v. Tyrone T. Duckett La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
  • State of Louisiana v. Kyron A. Theophile La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
  • State of Louisiana v. Brandon R. Laurant La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
    10/13/97), (per curiam).
  • State of Louisiana v. Franck A. Louis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
  • State v. Louis 259 So. 3d 1133 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
  • State v. Bibbins 258 So. 3d 134 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    10/13/97), (quoting State v. Sepulvado , , 767 (La.
  • State v. Doucette 243 So. 3d 704 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    10/13/97), (quoting State v. Sepulvado , , 767 (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Patrick Seth Jones La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
    Const. art. I, § 20, i.e., when it imposes ‘punishment disproportionate to the offense.” ’ State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), (quoting State v[.]
  • State v. Jones 229 So. 3d 1002 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    10/13/97), (quoting State v[.]
  • State of Louisiana v. Danial Lewayne Lafleur -Aka- Daniel Lafleur -Aka- Daniel Lee Lafleur -Aka- Danial Lafleur La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
    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)
  • State v. Lafleur 209 So. 3d 927 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    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.
  • State v. Lewis 207 So. 3d 1078 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    10/13/97), (per curiam).
  • State v. Dove 194 So. 3d 92 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    See State v. Soraparu, 97-1027, p. 1 (La.10/13/97), (per curiam).
  • State v. Ancalade 158 So. 3d 891 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Const, art. I, § 20, i.e. when it imposes ‘punishment disproportionate to the offense.’” State v. Soraparu, 1997-1027 (La.10/13/97)
  • State v. Jasper 149 So. 3d 1239 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Const, art. I, § 20, i.e., when it imposes “punishment disproportionate to the offense.” State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), .
  • State v. Norah 131 So. 3d 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    See State v. Soraparu, 97-1027, p. 1 (La.10/13/97), (per curiam).
  • State v. Hamdalla 126 So. 3d 619 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    See State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), .
  • State v. Hollins 123 So. 3d 840 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    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), (quoting State v. Humphr
  • State v. Jones 119 So. 3d 859 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    In State v. Soraparu, 97-1027, p. 1 (La.10/13/97), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that the relevant question in an appellate review of sentence 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), (quoting State v. Humph
  • State v. Chaplain 114 So. 3d 1274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Const, art. 1, § 20, i.e., when it imposes “punishment disproportionate to the offense.” State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), ().
  • State v. Slattery 116 So. 3d 804 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Const, art. I, § 20, ie., when it imposes ‘punishment disproportionate to the offense.’ ” State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), ().
  • State v. Parker 112 So. 3d 366 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Const. art. I, § 20, i.e., when it imposes ‘punishment disproportionate to the offense.’ ” State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), ().
  • State v. Sims 106 So. 3d 709 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), .
  • State v. Sam 105 So. 3d 988 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    In reviewing the issue of excessive sentence on appeal, 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. Soraparu, [497— 1027 (La.10/13/97), (per curiam ) (internal quotations in original, citations omitted).
  • State v. Wilson 99 So. 3d 1067 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Const, art. I, § 20, i.e., when it imposes “punishment disproportionate to the offense.” State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), ().
  • State v. Boudreaux 98 So. 3d 881 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Const, art. I, § 20, i.e., when it imposes “punishment disproportionate to the offense.” State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), .
  • State v. Colvin 85 So. 3d 663 La. 2012
    Const, art. I, § 20, ie., when it imposes ‘punishment disproportionate to the offense.’ ” State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), ().
  • State v. Knight 77 So. 3d 302 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), (per cu-riam).
  • 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), (quoting State v. H
  • 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), (quoting State v. Humph
  • 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), (quoting State v. Humph
  • State v. Lewis 48 So. 3d 1073 La. 2010
    The majority conceded at the outset that “[o]n 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.’ ” Lewis , 08-1317 at 15, 16 So.3d at 394 (quoting State v. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), ) (per curiam).
  • 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
    However, after the resentencing, and another remand by the fourth circuit, 2 the supreme court issued the following per curiam: *1021 State v. Soraparu, 97-1027, p. 1 (La.10/13/97), .
  • 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. Mazique 40 So. 3d 224 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    10/13/97), (per curiam).
  • 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), (quoting State v. Humph
  • State v. Hyman 33 So. 3d 271 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    On appellate review of a 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. Soraparu, 97-1027 (La.10/13/97), (per curiam) (citations omitted).