Summary
In State v. Huntsberry, 439 So.2d 432 (La. 1983) the court approved a fifty year sentence for an armed robber after first remanding the case for resentencing because of non-compliance with Art. 894.1 (409 So.2d 555) and determining that there was compliance the second time around.
Summary of this case from State v. ToomerOpinion
No. 82-KA-1722.
October 17, 1983.
APPEAL FROM FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF VERMILION, STATE OF LOUISIANA, HONORABLE SUETTA FONTENOT, J.
William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., J. Nathan Stansbury, Dist. Atty., Louis G. Garrott, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.
David Clarke, Lafayette, for defendant-appellant.
Defendant Steven Huntsberry was charged by bill of information with the crime of armed robbery, in violation of La.R.S. 14:64. On November 19, 1980, he was tried by a twelve person jury and found guilty as charged. He was thereafter sentenced to fifty years at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence.
On appeal originally, this Court affirmed his conviction, but upon finding that the trial judge failed to comply with the sentencing guidelines of La.C.Cr.P. art. 894.1, vacated the sentence and remanded the case to the district court for resentencing in accordance with law. State v. Huntsberry, 409 So.2d 555 (La. 1982).
On May 17, 1982, the trial judge again imposed a sentence of fifty years' imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence. Defendant again appeals, arguing that the sentence is still inadequately reasoned under La.C.Cr.P. art. 894.1 and that it is excessive. We find no merit in either of these arguments.
Decree
Accordingly, we affirm defendant's sentence.
SENTENCE AFFIRMED.