No. 2013-KA-0312 Precedential Processed

State v. Simmons

Louisiana Court of Appeal, First Circuit · Filed October 16, 2013 · 126 So. 3d 692

Cited by

State v. Smith 204 So. 3d 1035 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Ellis 190 So. 3d 354 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Cureaux 165 So. 3d 228 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Richardson 155 So. 3d 87 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014

Opinion text

BONIN, J., concurs with reasons. U respectfully concur. A sentence under the habitual offender law, like a sentence for an underlying offense, must be imposed without unreasonable delay. But unreasonable delay in sentencing on a multiple bill entitles a defendant to quashal of the bill seeking enhancement of the penal *702 ty. 1 Because the district attorney has not bothered to explain or justify the extraordinary delays in filing the multiple bill or in proceeding to a timely adjudication once filed despite the relatively short sentence of twenty-one months (with credit for time served) on the underlying conviction, the sentencing judge did not abuse his discretion by granting Mr. Simmons’ motion to quash the multiple offender bill of information. Returning Mr. Simmons to the penitentiary for an additional twenty-one months (forty-two months is the minimum sentence under the multiple bill) would under these circumstances be unreasonable. . The remedy for a trial court’s unreasonable delay in sentencing on the underlying offense is the intervention of a supervisory court to compel the sentencing without further delay. See La.C.Cr.P. art. 874.