State v. Hill

Louisiana Court of Appeal

State v. Hill

426 So. 2d 373, 1983 La. App. LEXIS 7663

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedJanuary 17, 1983

DocketNo. 15135-KA

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 426 So. 2d 373 (State v. Hill) 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. Hill, 426 So. 2d 373, 1983 La. App. LEXIS 7663 (La. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After pleading guilty to simple burglary, the defendant appeals that his sentence to 4V2 years at hard labor was excessive because he neither contemplated nor acted to cause or threaten “serious harm”, he acted under “strong provocation”, and the victim has been or will be compensated for the items stolen from her. LSA-Const. Art. 1, § 20. CCrP 894.1.

The trial court’s comments in the sentencing hearing included statements to the effect that defendant was not justified in stealing the personal clothing of the. victim even if the victim owed defendant some money, that several hundred dollars worth of clothing was taken, that the victim had not been compensated for her “substantial loss”, and that “serious harm” in this respect was caused to her. In fact, these comments were made in conjunction with the specific subsections of CCrP 894.1 upon which defendant relies to show excessiveness.

Among other things, the court considered the defendant’s age (28) and discussed with defendant his history of having been convicted more than a dozen times in 11 years of such crimes as theft and shoplifting (3 [374]*374times), assault with a dangerous weapon, unauthorized use of a movable, simple battery (2 times), aggravated assault (2 times), simple assault (2 times), possession of marijuana, and disturbing the peace and simple battery, the sentence for which was suspended. Under these circumstances, the sentence is not excessive and defendant has not shown that the trial court failed to follow CCrP 894.1 guidelines. See and compare State v. Latin, 412 So.2d 1357 (La.1982).

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM.

After pleading guilty to simple burglary, the defendant appeals that his sentence to 4V2 years at hard labor was excessive because he neither contemplated nor acted to cause or threaten “serious harm”, he acted under “strong provocation”, and the victim has been or will be compensated for the items stolen from her. LSA-Const. Art. 1, § 20. CCrP 894.1.

The trial court’s comments in the sentencing hearing included statements to the effect that defendant was not justified in stealing the personal clothing of the. victim even if the victim owed defendant some money, that several hundred dollars worth of clothing was taken, that the victim had not been compensated for her “substantial loss”, and that “serious harm” in this respect was caused to her. In fact, these comments were made in conjunction with the specific subsections of CCrP 894.1 upon which defendant relies to show excessiveness.

Among other things, the court considered the defendant’s age (28) and discussed with defendant his history of having been convicted more than a dozen times in 11 years of such crimes as theft and shoplifting (3 [374]*374times), assault with a dangerous weapon, unauthorized use of a movable, simple battery (2 times), aggravated assault (2 times), simple assault (2 times), possession of marijuana, and disturbing the peace and simple battery, the sentence for which was suspended. Under these circumstances, the sentence is not excessive and defendant has not shown that the trial court failed to follow CCrP 894.1 guidelines. See and compare State v. Latin, 412 So.2d 1357 (La.1982).

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

426 So. 2d 373, 1983 La. App. LEXIS 7663, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hill-lactapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack