Summary
In State v. Dickerson, 584 So.2d 1140 (La. 1991) (per curiam), the Supreme Court prohibited the imposition of a fine under the habitual offender law, noting that La. R.S. 15:529.1 only provides for enhanced sentences relating to the term of imprisonment and does not authorize the imposition of a fine.
Summary of this case from State v. BranchOpinion
No. 91-K-1120.
September 6, 1991.
In re Dickerson, William; — Defendant(s); Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Number CR90-0896; Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court, Div. "G", Number 6926-89.
Granted in part.
La.Rev.Stat. 15:529.1 requires that the sentencing judge vacate the 44 original sentence and resentence the defendant as a multiple offender. In resentencing, the judge must impose a sentence authorized by La.Rev.Stat. 15:529.1. That statute does no authorize the imposition of a fine, but only provides for enhanced sentences relating to the term of imprisonment. The trial judge was therefore without authority to impose a fine on resentencing under La.Rev.Stat. 15:529.1
According, the fine and default provisions of defendant's sentence are deleted. The application is otherwise denied.