State v. Bamburg

772 So. 2d 356, 2000 WL 1693125
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedNovember 2, 2000
Docket00-675
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 772 So. 2d 356 (State v. Bamburg) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Bamburg, 772 So. 2d 356, 2000 WL 1693125 (La. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

772 So.2d 356 (2000)

STATE of Louisiana
v.
William R. BAMBURG.

No. 00-675.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

November 2, 2000.

Don M. Burkett, District Attorney, Many, LA, Counsel for the State.

Lawrence C. Billeaud, Louisiana Appellate Project, Lafayette, LA, Counsel for Defendant.

(Court composed of BILLIE COLOMBARO WOODARD, MARC T. AMY, and MICHAEL G. SULLIVAN, Judges.)

SULLIVAN, Judge.

On September 28, 1999, William Bamburg was convicted by a jury of attempted armed robbery in violation of La.R.S. 14:27 and 14:64. On March 16, 2000, he was sentenced to serve five years at hard labor with credit for time served. He now seeks review of his sentence.

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

Defendant asserts that the trial judge inadvertently sentenced him to serve double the statutory minimum sentence when he actually intended to impose the minimum statutory sentence. Defendant failed to object orally at sentencing and did not timely file a motion to reconsider sentence; therefore, his claim for excessiveness of sentence is barred. See La.Code Crim.P. art. 881.1. See also, State v. Davis, 97-331 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/29/97); 702 So.2d 1014; writ denied, 97-2990 (La.11/6/98); 726 So.2d 919 (citing State v. Reeves, 619 So.2d 543 (La.1993)). Accordingly, this assignment of error is without merit.

We note that the trial court did not impose Defendant's sentence without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence as mandated by La.R.S. 14:64. Previously, this would have been treated as an illegally lenient sentence. However, pursuant to the provisions of La.R.S. 15:301.1, which became effective August 15, 1999, the sentence imposed by the trial court is deemed to contain those provisions.

Accordingly, Defendant's sentence of five years at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence and with credit for time served is affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

State of Louisiana v. Fillmore Wright
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2024
State of Louisiana v. Ezra J. Coutee, II
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2022
State of Louisiana v. Gerald Samuel
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2020
State of Louisiana v. Will Antonio Celestine
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2019
State v. Tutson
270 So. 3d 684 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2019)
State of Louisiana v. Michael Ja'rel Tutson
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2019
State v. Bench
256 So. 3d 345 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2018)
State of Louisiana v. Zachary Alexander Bench
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2018
State of Louisiana v. Sean J. Breaux
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2017
State of Louisiana v. Justin Seawright
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2017
State v. Purvis
217 So. 3d 470 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2017)
State of Louisiana v. Jacob Dewayne Purvis
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2017
State v. Price
216 So. 3d 304 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2017)
State of Louisiana v. John J. Landry III
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016
State of Louisiana v. Earl Lewis, IV
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
772 So. 2d 356, 2000 WL 1693125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bamburg-lactapp-2000.