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. Thomas, 719 So. 2d 49.

140 citing documents.

  • State v. Williams 8 So. 3d 3 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    State v. Smith, supra ( and State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), ).
  • State v. Ridgley 7 So. 3d 689 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    State v. Smith, 01-2574, p. 7 (La.1/14/03), , citing State v. Thomas, 98-1144, p. 2 (La.10/9/98), ; and the cases cited therein.
  • State of Louisiana v. Paul D. Massey La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
  • State v. Massey 999 So. 2d 343 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Jimmy James Mack La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98)
  • State v. Lay 986 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    10/9/98), (per curiam) ( (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. John Joseph La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    he trial court noted the same factors at the resentencing hearing.3 “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), ” State v. Alexander, 03-1291, p. 12 (La.App.
  • State v. Joseph 982 So. 2d 310 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    [3] "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), ."
  • State v. Stovall 977 So. 2d 1074 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144, p. 2 (La.10/9/98), ; (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Robin Leblanc La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    10/6/06), this court discussed the state of the law regrading consecutive and concurrent sentences as follows: In the case cited above by the trial court, State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), the defendant, a first-time felony offender, was sentenced to consecutive terms of imprisonment on three convictions, one of which was armed robbery.
  • State of Louisiana v. Raymond O'Neal Green La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    10/01/04), 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)
  • State of Louisiana v. Demarco D. Hawkins La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    10/9/98), ” See also State v. Walker, 00-3200 (La.
  • State v. Hawkins 956 So. 2d 146 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), ."
  • State of Louisiana v. Dustin K. Runyon La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98)
  • State v. Runyon 944 So. 2d 820 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Karl Thibodeaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    The Court has considered the guidance provided by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Thomas, for the benefit of counsel, where it said, “although Louisiana law favors concurrent sentences for crimes committed as part of a single transaction, a trial judge retains discretion to impose consecutive penalties on the basis of other factors, including the offenders past criminality, violence in the charged crimes, or the risk he or she poses
  • State v. Thibodeaux 924 So. 2d 1205 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    The Court has considered the guidance provided by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Thomas , for the benefit of counsel, , where it said, "although Louisiana law favors concurrent sentences for crimes committed as part of a single transaction, a trial judge retains discretion to impose consecutive penalties on the basis of other factors, including the offenders past criminality, violence in the charged crimes, or the risk he or she pose
  • State v. Jefferson 922 So. 2d 577 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144, p. 1 (La.10/9/98), ; State v. Dempsey, XXXX-XXXX, p. 5 (La.App.
  • State v. Scott 927 So. 2d 441 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    On appellate review of a sentence, the relevant question is “ ‘whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.” ’ State v. Thomas, 98-1144, pp. 1-2 (La.10/9/98), (per curiam)
  • State v. Vollm 887 So. 2d 664 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Timothy Vollm, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
  • State v. Walton 872 So. 2d 1221 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), .
  • 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), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Dillon James Merritt La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    The Court has considered the guidance provided by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Thomas, for the benefit of counsel, where it said, “although Louisiana law favors concurrent sentences for crimes committed as part of a single transaction, a trial judge retains discretion to impose consecutive penalties on the basis of other factors, including the offenders past criminality, violence in the charged crimes, or
  • State v. Merritt 875 So. 2d 80 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    The Court has considered the guidance provided by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Thomas , for the benefit of counsel, , where it said, "although Louisiana law favors concurrent sentences for crimes committed as part of a single transaction, a trial judge retains discretion to impose consecutive penalties on the basis of other factors, including the offenders past criminality, violence in the charged crimes, or the risk he or she pose
  • State v. Hartwell 866 So. 2d 899 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, citing Augustine and State v. Thomas, 98-1144, p. 2 (La.10/9/98), .
  • State v. Cowart 862 So. 2d 225 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144, pp. 1-2 (La.10/9/98), .
  • State v. Dempsey 844 So. 2d 1037 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), .
  • State v. Smith 839 So. 2d 165 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    a trial judge retains discretion to impose consecutive penalties on the basis of other factors, including the offender’s past criminality, violence in the charged crimes, or the risk he or she poses to the general safety of the community.” State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), .
  • 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. Ste. Marie 824 So. 2d 358 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    The other cases: , that is from the Supreme Court; ; State v. White from the Third Circuit, 704-376; State v. Jones out of the Fourth, 744-165; and State v. Boyles[Boros], that’s from the Fifth Circuit, .
  • State v. Aleman 809 So. 2d 1056 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), ; Lefeure, 778 So.2d at 755 .
  • State v. Walker 789 So. 2d 86 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), ; State v. Williams, 98-1146, p. 23 (La.
  • State v. Boudreaux 782 So. 2d 1194 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    However, we note that the supreme court, in State v. Thomas, 98-1144, pp. 1-2 (La.10/9/98); -50 , held: Although Louisiana law favors concurrent sentences for crimes committed as part of a single transaction, La.C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Robinson 770 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Robinson 770 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), ; (La.
  • State v. Ulmer 751 So. 2d 1017 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
    "On appellate review of sentence, the relevant question is `whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.'" State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), .
  • State v. Watts 746 So. 2d 58 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    The Louisiana Supreme Court recently noted that "[o]n appellate review of sentence, the relevant question is `whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.'" State v. Thomas, 98-1144, pp. 1-2 (La.10/9/98), .
  • State v. Williams 738 So. 2d 640 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), , 1998 WL 713205 (citations omitted).
  • State v. Duhe 733 So. 2d 648 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    "On appellate review of sentence, the relevant question is `whether the trial court abused its broad sentencing discretion, not whether another sentence might have been more appropriate.'" State v. Thomas, 98-1144 (La.10/9/98), .