Summary
stating that an appellate court should not rely on the self-activating provisions of La.R.S. 15:301.1 when the trial court imposes limits beyond those statutorily authorized
Summary of this case from State v. AyalaOpinion
No. 2004-KO-0017.
May 14, 2004.
IN RE: Sanders, Edith; — Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court Div. G, Nos. 99-2164; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 03-KA-638.
Granted. See per curiam.
CDK
PFC
BJJ
JPV
CDT
JTK
JLW
On Writ of Certiorari to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal
Granted. The defendant's sentence of 15 years imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence is amended to provide that the defendant shall serve a term of 15 years imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of probation or suspension of sentence, and without benefit of parole for a period of five years. See La.R.S. 40:967(B)(4)(b) (1997 La. Acts 1284); La.R.S. 15:529.1(G). In cases in which the sentencing error made by the trial court does not involve the omission of a restrictive term specified by the legislature as part of the sentence but the imposition of limits beyond what the legislature has authorized in the sentencing statute(s), an appellate court should not rely on La.R.S. 15:301.1(A) to correct the error as a matter of law but should correct the sentence on its own authority under La.C.Cr.P. art. 882 to correct an illegal sentence "at any time".