State Ex Rel. Carthan v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State Ex Rel. Carthan v. State

71 So. 3d 299, 2011 La. LEXIS 2314, 2011 WL 4948281

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedOctober 7, 2011

Docket2010-KH-2199

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 71 So. 3d 299 (State Ex Rel. Carthan v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State Ex Rel. Carthan v. State, 71 So. 3d 299, 2011 La. LEXIS 2314, 2011 WL 4948281 (La. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Carthan, Ricky; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Beauregard, 36th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. CR196-98; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 10-00319.

Denied. Because the statutes in effect at the time he committed the underlying offense authorized a life sentence based on relator’s status as a third or fourth offender, his sentence was not rendered illegal as a result of the vacation of one of the predicate convictions upon which his habitual offender adjudication rested. See La. C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172. Cf. La.C.Cr.P. art. 882; State v. Singleton, 09-1269, pp. 1-2, (La.4/23/10), 33 So.3d 889, 889-90 (“To the extent that relator’s habitual offender sentence exceeds the maximum penalty the trial court could have imposed for the underlying offense without enhancement of sentence under La.R.S. 15:529.1, relator’s application is in the nature of a motion to set aside an *300 illegal sentence as a matter of La.C.Cr.P. art. 882, which permits correction of a sentence in excess of what the law provides ‘at any time.’ ”).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Carthan, Ricky; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Beauregard, 36th Judicial District Court Div. B, No. CR196-98; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 10-00319.

Denied. Because the statutes in effect at the time he committed the underlying offense authorized a life sentence based on relator’s status as a third or fourth offender, his sentence was not rendered illegal as a result of the vacation of one of the predicate convictions upon which his habitual offender adjudication rested. See La. C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; State ex rel. Melinie v. State, 93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172. Cf. La.C.Cr.P. art. 882; State v. Singleton, 09-1269, pp. 1-2, (La.4/23/10), 33 So.3d 889, 889-90 (“To the extent that relator’s habitual offender sentence exceeds the maximum penalty the trial court could have imposed for the underlying offense without enhancement of sentence under La.R.S. 15:529.1, relator’s application is in the nature of a motion to set aside an *300 illegal sentence as a matter of La.C.Cr.P. art. 882, which permits correction of a sentence in excess of what the law provides ‘at any time.’ ”).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 So. 3d 299, 2011 La. LEXIS 2314, 2011 WL 4948281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-carthan-v-state-la-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack