State v. Hunt
This text of 707 So. 2d 165 (State v. Hunt) 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.
Opinion
h WRIT DENIED.
An habitual offender adjudication consists of a “finding” ancillary to the imposition of sentence, not a “conviction.” See, e.g., State v. Dorthey, 623 So.2d 1276, 1279 (La.1993); State v. Mayweather, 28,271 (La.App.2d Cir. 06/26/96), 677 So.2d 594. Accordingly, we are convinced that a trial court retains authority to adjudicate and sentence a defendant as an habitual offender after an order of appeal has been entered. La.C.Cr.P. art. 916(8); State v. Fields, 96-0336 (La.App. 1st Cir. 03/27/97), 691 So.2d 747, 750-751, writ denied, 97-1081 (La.10/13/97), 703 So.2d 610; State v. Hopkins, 94-1530 (La.App. 3d Cir. 07/05/95), 663 So.2d 54; State v. Williams, 522 So.2d 1171 (La.App. 4th Cir.1988).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
707 So. 2d 165, 1998 La. App. LEXIS 273, 1998 WL 78209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hunt-lactapp-1998.