State v. Prince

701 So. 2d 965, 1997 La. LEXIS 3097
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in State v. Prince. Read the opinion of the Court — 701 So. 2d 965
Supreme Court of Louisiana·Decided September 26, 1997·No. No. 97-K-0727·Published

Opinion

In re Prince, Thomas E.; — Defendant(s); applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; Parish of Claiborne, 2nd Judicial District Court, Div. “A”, No. 17,520; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 29208-KA.

[966]*966Granted 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

State v. Prince, 701 So. 2d 965, 1997 La. LEXIS 3097 (La. 1997).

701 So. 2d 965 (State v. Prince) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Patterson
442 So. 2d 442 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1983)
State v. Lee
641 So. 2d 206 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1994)