State v. Mosby

180 So. 3d 1274, 2015 La. LEXIS 2421, 2015 WL 7694778
CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana
DecidedNovember 20, 2015
DocketNo. 2014-K-2704
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 180 So. 3d 1274 (State v. Mosby) 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. Mosby, 180 So. 3d 1274, 2015 La. LEXIS 2421, 2015 WL 7694778 (La. 2015).

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

|,tWrit granted in part,, otherwise denied. We' find the sentence for this particular defendant is constitutionally excessive. See La. Const, art. I, § 20. Thus, we vacate the defendant’s sentence. Imposition of a 30 year term of imprisonment on this non-violent offender who is 72 years of age and suffers from severe infirmities is “grossly out.of proportion to the severity” of the offense, and it amounts to nothing more than the “purposeful imposition of pain and suffering” which renders this sentence on this particular defendant unconstitutional. State v. Dorthey, 623 So.2d 1276, 1280-81 (La.1993). Indeed, it is unconscionable. We find a departure from the sentence mandated by R.S. 15:529.1 is constitutionally required for this particular defendant- As this Court stated so well in Dorthey,

If, in this case when defendant is ultimately sentenced, the trial judge were to find that the punishment mandated by R.S. 15:529.1, makes no “measurable contribution to acceptable goals of punishment” -or that the sentence amounted to nothing more than “the purposeful imposition of pain and suffering” and is “grossly out of proportion to the severity of the crime[,”] he has the option, indeed the duty, to reduce such sentence to one | ¿that would not be constitutionally excessive. ■ •

623 So.2d at 1280-81. Accordingly, we remand this case to the District Court and order it to re-sentence this defendant, reducing the term of her imprisonment to one that would "not be constitutionally excessive and stating for the record its considerations and factual basis'. La.C.Cr. P. art. 894.1.

WEIMER, J., dissents and would deny the writ. CLARK, J., dissents and assigns reasons.

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

Related

State of Louisiana v. Adrian Anton Dorsey
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2022
State of Louisiana v. Francis X Ross Jr.
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2020
State of Louisiana v. Frin Wayne Coward
Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2020
State v. Thompkins
274 So. 3d 1252 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2019)
State v. Dorsey
260 So. 3d 616 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2018)
State v. Taylor
258 So. 3d 217 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2018)
State v. Dickerson
251 So. 3d 1062 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2018)
State v. Hickman
227 So. 3d 246 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2017)
State of Louisiana v. Thayer Green
225 So. 3d 1033 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2017)
State of Louisiana v. Corei K. Guidry
Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2017
State v. James
208 So. 3d 876 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2017)
State v. Johnson
207 So. 3d 1101 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016)
State v. Ross
207 So. 3d 511 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016)
State v. Hagans
202 So. 3d 475 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 2016)
State v. Dowell
198 So. 3d 243 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016)
State v. Ladd
192 So. 3d 235 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016)
State v. Ellis
190 So. 3d 354 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
180 So. 3d 1274, 2015 La. LEXIS 2421, 2015 WL 7694778, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mosby-la-2015.