Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1935–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Louisiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Collinsgreen2 sentences1996State v. Collins, 584 So.2d 356, 359 (La.App. 4th Cir.1991). 1994State v. Collins, 584 So.2d 356, 359 (La.App. 4th Cir.1991). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Francisgreen2 sentences2025See Loggin, supra. See also State v. Francis, 19-227 (La. 4/29/19), 268 So.3d 289 (per curiam) (The Supreme Court found that the defendant did not waive the delay and that the error in failing to observe the delay was not harmless because the defendant challenged his manslaughter sentence. 2023State v. Francis, 2019-0227, p. 1 (La. 4/29/19), 268 So.3d 289 (citing State v. Augustine, 555 So.2d 1331 (La. 1990)). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Fostergreen1 sentence2016See State v. Foster, 02-0910, p. 3 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/11/02), 834 So.2d 1188, 1191 . .There is some discrepancy with regard to whether Ms. Jones went to the bank or to work before returning home on the day of the incident. | 1 | 1 |
Lassere v. STATE, DEPT. OF HEALTH & HOSP., OFFICE OF PUBLIC HEALTHgreen1 sentence2006See Lassere v. State, Department of Health & Hospitals, Office of Public Health, 00-306 (La.App. 1 Cir. 3/28/01) , 808 So.2d 513 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Williamsgreen1 sentence1999See State v. Williams, 97-970 (La.App. 5th Cir. 1/27/98), 708 So.2d 1086 ; State v. Allen, 93-844 (La.App. 5th Cir. 5/11/94), 638 So.2d 263 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hardygreen1 sentence1997State v. Hardy, 432 So.2d 865, 866 (La.1983). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Milsongreen1 sentence1996This court set forth the law and jurisprudence governing unreasonable sentencing delays in State v. Milson, 458 So.2d 1037, 1039 (La.App. 3 Cir.1984): It is clear that a defendant is statutorily entitled to the imposition of sentence without unreasonable delay. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Augustine
green
1 sentence2023State v. Francis, 2019-0227, p. 1 (La. 4/29/19), 268 So.3d 289 (citing State v. Augustine, 555 So.2d 1331 (La. 1990)). | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Bibbins
neutral
2 sentences2015In State v. Bibbins, 13-875 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/9/14) ; 140 So.3d 153, 169-70 , writs denied, 14-1015 (La.12/8/14); 153 So.3d 440 and 14-994 (La.12/8/14), 153 So.3d 439 , this Court found that while the defendant did not expressly waive the mandatory statutory delay between the trial court’s ruling on the motion for new trial and the sentencing, the defendant did not object to proceeding with sentencing or raise the trial judge’s failure to observe the delay as an error. 2015In State v. Bibbins, 13-875 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/9/14) ; 140 So.3d 153, 169-70 , writs denied, 14-1015 (La.12/8/14); 153 So.3d 440 and 14-994 (La.12/8/14), 153 So.3d 439 , this Court found that while the defendant did not expressly waive the mandatory statutory delay between the trial court’s ruling on the motion for new trial and the sentencing, the defendant did not object to proceeding with sentencing or raise the trial judge’s failure to observe the delay as an error. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Bibbins
green
1 sentence2015In State v. Bibbins, 13-875 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/9/14) ; 140 So.3d 153, 169-70 , writs denied, 14-1015 (La.12/8/14); 153 So.3d 440 and 14-994 (La.12/8/14), 153 So.3d 439 , this Court found that while the defendant did not expressly waive the mandatory statutory delay between the trial court’s ruling on the motion for new trial and the sentencing, the defendant did not object to proceeding with sentencing or raise the trial judge’s failure to observe the delay as an error. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Cope
neutral
1 sentence2015In State v. Bibbins, 13-875 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/9/14) ; 140 So.3d 153, 169-70 , writs denied, 14-1015 (La.12/8/14); 153 So.3d 440 and 14-994 (La.12/8/14), 153 So.3d 439 , this Court found that while the defendant did not expressly waive the mandatory statutory delay between the trial court’s ruling on the motion for new trial and the sentencing, the defendant did not object to proceeding with sentencing or raise the trial judge’s failure to observe the delay as an error. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Durr v. Natchitoches Municipal Fire & Police Civil Service Board
neutral
1 sentence2014Id. at 722 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Wilson
green
1 sentence2011Further, in State v. Wilson, 99-105, p. 6 (La.App. 5 Cir. 7/27/99), 742 So.2d 957, 960 , writ denied, 99-2583 (La.2/11/00), 754 So.2d 935 , the defendant did not object at sentencing or raise the trial judge’s failure to observe the delay as error, yet he specifically challenged the sentence as excessive. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Wilson
green
1 sentence2011Further, in State v. Wilson, 99-105, p. 6 (La.App. 5 Cir. 7/27/99), 742 So.2d 957, 960 , writ denied, 99-2583 (La.2/11/00), 754 So.2d 935 , the defendant did not object at sentencing or raise the trial judge’s failure to observe the delay as error, yet he specifically challenged the sentence as excessive. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Allen
green
1 sentence1999See State v. Williams, 97-970 (La.App. 5th Cir. 1/27/98), 708 So.2d 1086 ; State v. Allen, 93-844 (La.App. 5th Cir. 5/11/94), 638 So.2d 263 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Broussard
green
1 sentence1990There, the court reasoned that “upon conviction a defendant is entitled to know the full consequences of the verdict within a reasonable time.” Id. at 110-111 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
State v. George
green
2 sentences1966Nevertheless, such counsel suggest in the supplemental brief that the case of State v. George, 218 La. 18 , 48 So.2d 265 , “might be taken for the proposition that, in addition to violation of the twenty-four hour’s delay rule, the defendant must show some prejudice in order for the sentence to be set aside”, conformably with the provisions of LRS 15:557. 1966Nevertheless, such counsel suggest in the supplemental brief that the case of State v. George, 218 La. 18 , 48 So.2d 265 , “might be taken for the proposition that, in addition to violation of the twenty-four hour’s delay rule, the defendant must show some prejudice in order for the sentence to be set aside”, conformably with the provisions of LRS 15:557. | 1 | 1966–1966 |
Dennis Sheen Transfer v. Georgia Casualty Co.
neutral
2 sentences1935The case Dennis Sheen Transfer v.. Georgia Casualty Co., 163 La. 969 , 113 So. 165 deals with the result of delay on the part of the assured only, and the situation was not the same as in the present case. 1935The case Dennis Sheen Transfer v.. Georgia Casualty Co., 163 La. 969 , 113 So. 165 deals with the result of delay on the part of the assured only, and the situation was not the same as in the present case. | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.