From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Scott

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit
Jun 5, 1986
490 So. 2d 465 (La. Ct. App. 1986)

Opinion

No. KA-4969.

June 5, 1986.

APPEAL FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS, SECTION F, STATE OF LOUISIANA, HONORABLE DENNIS J. WALDRON, J.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara B. Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harry F. Connick, Dist. Atty., Michael E. McMahon, Asst. Dist. Atty., New Orleans, for State.

Dwight Doskey, Orleans Indigent Defender Program, New Orleans, for defendant.

Before SCHOTT, BYRNES and ARMSTRONG, JJ.


Defendant was convicted of possession of heroin with intent to distribute in violation of R.S. 40:966 and sentenced to life at hard labor without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. In his brief he requests only a review of the record for errors patent and assigns no specific error.

The minute entry of the trial is not in the record. Thus, we questioned whether the jury composition was proper and the verdict responsive although defendant has raised neither point. As to the composition of the jury the record contains a jury list which shows twelve jurors were seated at the beginning of this one day trial. At the end of the trial transcript there is this statement by the court: "Each of the copies of that exhibit are now being distributed among the 12 jurors . . ." As to the responsiveness of the verdict, defendant was charged with possession of heroin with intent to distribute and the transcript contains the entry at the end of the record: "Verdict: Guilty as Charged." Accordingly even though the minute entry is missing the record shows the jury was properly constituted and the verdict responsive.

An error patent appears in defendant's sentence, which is for life imprisonment without benefit of probation, parole, or suspension of sentence. R.S. 40:966(B)(1) prescribes the maximum sentence as life without benefit of probation or suspension of sentence but not without benefit of parole. Thus, the sentence was illegally excessive and must be vacated.

Accordingly, the conviction is affirmed but the sentence is vacated and the case remanded for resentencing in accordance with law.

CONVICTION AFFIRMED SENTENCE VACATED REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.


Summaries of

State v. Scott

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit
Jun 5, 1986
490 So. 2d 465 (La. Ct. App. 1986)
Case details for

State v. Scott

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF LOUISIANA v. ALFRED SCOTT

Court:Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit

Date published: Jun 5, 1986

Citations

490 So. 2d 465 (La. Ct. App. 1986)

Citing Cases

State v. Valentine

Although the penalty provision for possession of heroin with intent to distribute, LSA-R.S. 40:966 (B)(1),…

State v. Madina

This court has held that to deny a defendant parole eligibility under LSA-R.S. 40:966 is illegally excessive.…