State ex rel. Ducre v. State

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State ex rel. Ducre v. State

883 So. 2d 1054, 2004 La. LEXIS 3083, 2004 WL 2479946

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedOctober 15, 2004

DocketNo. 2004-KP-0988

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 883 So. 2d 1054 (State ex rel. Ducre 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. Ducre v. State, 883 So. 2d 1054, 2004 La. LEXIS 3083, 2004 WL 2479946 (La. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Ducre, Izeal; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 278595-1; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2003 KW 2877.

Granted in part; denied in part. Relator’s sentence for possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute is amended to delete the denial of parole eligibility on the first five years of the term. The version of [1055]*1055the statute in effect at the time of the commission of the crime, see R.S. 40:967(B)(1), 1993 La. Acts 969, did not deny parole eligibility, and neither R.S. 15:529.1(A)(l)(a) nor 15:529.1(G) gives the trial court any additional authority to place restrictions on the parole eligibility of a second offender. In all other respects, the application is denied.

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

In re Ducre, Izeal; — Plaintiff; Applying for Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of St. Tammany, 22nd Judicial District Court Div. B, No. 278595-1; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2003 KW 2877.

Granted in part; denied in part. Relator’s sentence for possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute is amended to delete the denial of parole eligibility on the first five years of the term. The version of [1055]*1055the statute in effect at the time of the commission of the crime, see R.S. 40:967(B)(1), 1993 La. Acts 969, did not deny parole eligibility, and neither R.S. 15:529.1(A)(l)(a) nor 15:529.1(G) gives the trial court any additional authority to place restrictions on the parole eligibility of a second offender. In all other respects, the application is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

883 So. 2d 1054, 2004 La. LEXIS 3083, 2004 WL 2479946, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-ducre-v-state-la-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack