State ex rel. Hudson v. Whitley

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State ex rel. Hudson v. Whitley

607 So. 2d 548, 1992 La. LEXIS 3620, 1992 WL 347627

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedNovember 20, 1992

DocketNo. 91-KH-2227

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 607 So. 2d 548 (State ex rel. Hudson v. Whitley) 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. Hudson v. Whitley, 607 So. 2d 548, 1992 La. LEXIS 3620, 1992 WL 347627 (La. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Hudson, Keith J.; — Plaintiff(s); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “I”, No. 274-064.

Granted. Relator’s sentences are vacated, and this case is remanded to the district court for resentencing in accordance with the procedures and guidelines set forth in State v. Desdunes, 579 So.2d 452 (La.1991); State v. Washington, 578 So.2d 1150 (La.1991); State ex rel. Jackson v. Smith, 578 So.2d 1150 (La.1991). Relator’s presence at resentencing is required and he must be afforded the opportunity to present evidence and argument regarding the intent of the original sentencing judge. State v. Husband, 593 So.2d 1257 (La.1992). See also La.C.Cr.P. Art. 835. In light of the fact that the trial judge in this instance will be imposing the first legal sentence in the case “he ... should also consider the sentencing guidelines applicable to sentences imposed after January 31, 1992.” State v. Husband, supra, 593 So.2d at 1258.

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

In re Hudson, Keith J.; — Plaintiff(s); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court, Div. “I”, No. 274-064.

Granted. Relator’s sentences are vacated, and this case is remanded to the district court for resentencing in accordance with the procedures and guidelines set forth in State v. Desdunes, 579 So.2d 452 (La.1991); State v. Washington, 578 So.2d 1150 (La.1991); State ex rel. Jackson v. Smith, 578 So.2d 1150 (La.1991). Relator’s presence at resentencing is required and he must be afforded the opportunity to present evidence and argument regarding the intent of the original sentencing judge. State v. Husband, 593 So.2d 1257 (La.1992). See also La.C.Cr.P. Art. 835. In light of the fact that the trial judge in this instance will be imposing the first legal sentence in the case “he ... should also consider the sentencing guidelines applicable to sentences imposed after January 31, 1992.” State v. Husband, supra, 593 So.2d at 1258.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

607 So. 2d 548, 1992 La. LEXIS 3620, 1992 WL 347627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-hudson-v-whitley-la-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack