State v. Cole
Also decided on this docket: La., September 1, 1995 659 So. 2d 502
State v. Cole, 664 So. 2d 367 (La. 1995).
Cited by
Overruled in 3
- State of Louisiana v. Darrion A. Brown La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
- State Of Louisiana v. David H. Brown (Parish of Lafourche) Convictions Affirmed; Death Sentences … La. 2021
- State v. Alexander 267 So. 3d 682 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
- State v. Jefferson 261 So. 3d 793 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
- State v. Walker 221 So. 3d 951 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
- STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS READO NARGO A/K/A RENALDO NARGO La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
- State v. Nargo 193 So. 3d 1263 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
- State v. Wells 191 So. 3d 1127 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
- State v. Preston 178 So. 3d 207 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
- State v. French 79 So. 3d 1155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
- State v. Martin 72 So. 3d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
- State v. Montejo 40 So. 3d 952 La. 2010
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- State v. Cole 659 So. 2d 502
- State v. Cole 650 So. 2d 1254
Opinion text
^j() HDIi/Ib The state’s motion to dismiss is hereby GRANTED; our order of September 1,1995, 659 So.2d 502 , is recalled as improvidently granted; and this case is removed from our November, 1995 docket. It now appears that pursuant to the remand order in State v. Cole, 94—1280 (La.App. 4th Cir. 2/23/95), 650 So.2d 1254 , and before he filed his writ application in this Court, relator returned to the district court, withdrew his guilty plea, and entered another guilty plea as part of an agreement with the state disposing of three pending prosecutions against him. Those guilty pleas represent “on-the-record, wholly logical, non-vindictive reasons ...,” Texas v. McCullough, 475 U.S. 134,140 , 106 S.Ct. 976, 980 , 89 L.Ed.2d 104 (1986), explaining any increase in sentence in this case and rendering the question for which we initially granted writs moot. /s/ Pascal F, Calogero, Jr. JiAMENDMENT TO ORDER OF NOVEMBER 16, 1995 This Court granted relator’s application for supervisory review to consider the decision of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeal in State v. Cole, 94-1280 (La.App. 4th Cir. 2/23/95), 650 So.2d 1254 , that a trial judge may not impose a fine-only sentence on a defendant adjudicated a second offender under the provisions of La.R.S. 15:529.1(A)(l)(a), even when the predicate offense allows for a sentence of imprisonment and/or a fine, and that relator’s guilty plea induced by the promise of such a sentence would therefore have to be set aside and relator allowed to plead anew on remand of the case. Before argument on our November, 1995 docket, the state filed a motion to dismiss relator’s application on grounds that it was moot. It appears that pursuant to the Fourth Circuit’s remand order, and before he filed his writ application in this Court, relator returned to the district court, withdrew his guilty plea, and entered another guilty plea as part of an agreement with the state disposing of three pending prosecutions against him. Those guilty pleas represent “on-the-record, wholly logical, non-vindictive reasons,” Texas v. McCullough, 475 U.S. 134, 140 , 106 S.Ct. 976, 980 , 89 L.Ed.2d 104 (1986), explaining any increase in sentence in this case and rendering the question for which we initially granted writs moot. Accordingly, this Court has granted the state’s motion to dismiss (for mootness), recalled our writ grant order of September 1, 1995, and removed this case from our November docket. /s/ Pascal F. Calogero, Jr. Chief Justice