State v. Chisley

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Chisley

923 So. 2d 618, 2006 La. LEXIS 765, 2006 WL 584690

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedMarch 10, 2006

DocketNo. 2005-KH-1558

StatusPublished

This text of 923 So. 2d 618 (State v. Chisley) 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 v. Chisley, 923 So. 2d 618, 2006 La. LEXIS 765, 2006 WL 584690 (La. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Writ granted in part; otherwise denied. Because R.S. 40:967(B)(4)(b) allows and requires a prohibition on parole only for “the first two years” of the sentence, see 2001 La. Acts 403, relator’s sentence imposed under that statute is amended to change the prohibition on parole for the entire 15-year term to a prohibition for only two years. See State ex rel. Turner v. State, 00-2034 (La.4/12/01), 788 So.2d 1199; State v. Gardner, 99-2040 (La.12/17/99), 750 So.2d 994; State v. Malone, 31,726, p. 4 (La.App.2d Cir.1/20/99), 728 So.2d 500; State v. Hunter, 33,066, p. 11 (La.App.2d Cir.9/27/00), 768 So.2d 687, 694. The district court is directed to make an entry in the minutes reflecting this change and the clerk of court is directed to transmit the original of the minute entry to officer in charge of the institution to which the defendant has been sentenced. La.C.Cr.C. art. 892(B)(2). In all other respects, the application is denied.

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

PER CURIAM.

Writ granted in part; otherwise denied. Because R.S. 40:967(B)(4)(b) allows and requires a prohibition on parole only for “the first two years” of the sentence, see 2001 La. Acts 403, relator’s sentence imposed under that statute is amended to change the prohibition on parole for the entire 15-year term to a prohibition for only two years. See State ex rel. Turner v. State, 00-2034 (La.4/12/01), 788 So.2d 1199; State v. Gardner, 99-2040 (La.12/17/99), 750 So.2d 994; State v. Malone, 31,726, p. 4 (La.App.2d Cir.1/20/99), 728 So.2d 500; State v. Hunter, 33,066, p. 11 (La.App.2d Cir.9/27/00), 768 So.2d 687, 694. The district court is directed to make an entry in the minutes reflecting this change and the clerk of court is directed to transmit the original of the minute entry to officer in charge of the institution to which the defendant has been sentenced. La.C.Cr.C. art. 892(B)(2). In all other respects, the application is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

923 So. 2d 618, 2006 La. LEXIS 765, 2006 WL 584690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-chisley-la-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack