State v. Champagne

Louisiana Court of Appeal

State v. Champagne

452 So. 2d 1287, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 9065

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedJune 27, 1984

DocketNo. CR83-696

StatusPublished

This text of 452 So. 2d 1287 (State v. Champagne) 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. Champagne, 452 So. 2d 1287, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 9065 (La. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

GUIDRY, Judge.

The defendant, Nathan Champagne, pleaded guilty to the charge of attempted [1288]*1288forcible rape, a violation of LSA-R.S. 14:42.1 and 14:27, on November 15, 1982. On April 29, 1983, after a pre-sentence investigation, the trial judge sentenced the defendant to seventeen years at hard labor. The defendant has appealed the sentence.

The defendant filed no assignments of error pursuant to LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 844. Therefore, the scope of appellate review in this case is limited to a review of the pleadings and proceedings, without inspection of the evidence, for errors patent. LSA-C. Cr.P. Art. 920; State v. Zeno, 322 So.2d 136 (La.1975). We have carefully examined the record in this case pursuant to the mandate of LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 920, and finding no errors patent on the face of the record, we affirm the defendant’s conviction and the sentence imposed.

AFFIRMED.

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

GUIDRY, Judge.

The defendant, Nathan Champagne, pleaded guilty to the charge of attempted [1288]*1288forcible rape, a violation of LSA-R.S. 14:42.1 and 14:27, on November 15, 1982. On April 29, 1983, after a pre-sentence investigation, the trial judge sentenced the defendant to seventeen years at hard labor. The defendant has appealed the sentence.

The defendant filed no assignments of error pursuant to LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 844. Therefore, the scope of appellate review in this case is limited to a review of the pleadings and proceedings, without inspection of the evidence, for errors patent. LSA-C. Cr.P. Art. 920; State v. Zeno, 322 So.2d 136 (La.1975). We have carefully examined the record in this case pursuant to the mandate of LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 920, and finding no errors patent on the face of the record, we affirm the defendant’s conviction and the sentence imposed.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

452 So. 2d 1287, 1984 La. App. LEXIS 9065, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-champagne-lactapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack