State v. Prince
This text of 701 So. 2d 965 (State v. Prince) 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.
Opinion
STATE of Louisiana
v.
Thomas E. PRINCE.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
*966 Granted in part; denied in part. The sentence imposed by the trial court is amended to delete the requirement of restitution. The relevant statutes, La.R.S. 14:27; La.R.S. 14:31; La.R.S.La. 14:44.1, do not authorize a district court to impose restitution in a felony case as part of an executory sentence of imprisonment. State v. Lee, 94-0814 (La. 6/17/94), 641 So.2d 206; State v. Patterson, 442 So.2d 442 (La.1983). Compare La.R.S. 14:67.3(F) (authorizing restitution as part of sentence for theft); La.C.Cr.P. art. 895.1 (authorizing restitution as a condition of probation); La.R.S. 15:574.4(J) (authorizing restitution as a condition of parole). In all other respects the application is denied.
JOHNSON, J., not on panel.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
701 So. 2d 965, 1997 WL 640620, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-prince-la-1997.