Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

647 So. 2d 535

Docket No. Cr 94-658.

State v. Townsend

STATE of Louisiana v. David Floyd TOWNSEND.

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided December 7, 1994.

Louisiana Court of Appeal · decided 1994-12-07

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently February 2016

3 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“The record further reflects that Brooks' motion for new trial was ruled upon immediately after she had been sentenced. LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 853 provides in pertinent part that "[a] motion for a new trial must be filed and disposed of before sentence." This Court has held that sentencing prior to a ruling on these motions must be set aside and the case remanded for a ruling on the motions and then re-sentencing. In this case, there was a ruling on the motion for new trial after sentencing and there is no need to remand for a ruling on that motion. Further, Brooks noted that she had planned on waiving her 24-hour sentencing delay between a ruling on the motion for new trial and sentencing. The timing of the trial court, although incorrect, constitutes harmless error. The conviction and sentence must be affirmed.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 981 So. 2d 867 - State v. Robinson

Relies on 409 So. 2d 554 - State v. Randolph · State v. Camou

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1994-12-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Morgan J. Goudeau III, Opelousas, for State of Louisiana.

¶2Edward J. Lopez, Opelousas, for David Floyd Townsend.

¶3Before DOUCET, COOKS and DECUIR, JJ.

¶4COOKS, Judge.

¶5David Floyd Townsend was charged by bill of indictment with perjury, a violation of LSA-R.S. 14:123. After trial, a jury found Townsend guilty as charged. On June 25, 1993, Townsend's interim attorney, William T. Barstow, filed a motion for a new trial. Edward Lopez later replaced Barstow; and he also filed a motion for a new trial on July 1, 1993. Both motions were because Barstow failed to appear and argue at the hearing. The second motion filed by Lopez was taken under advisement. Townsend was subsequently sentenced to serve three years at hard labor and fined one thousand dollars. His three-year sentence was suspended; and, he was placed on three years active supervised probation. He was also ordered to pay a supervisory fee and serve six months in the parish jail. Townsend appeals his conviction.

¶6We note an error patent which requires that Townsend's sentence be vacated and his case remanded to the trial court. During Townsend's sentencing, his counsel informed the trial judge he had not ruled on the July 1, 1993 motion for a new trial. The trial judge replied he "thought [he] issued a minute entry ... denying the motion for a new trial" and sentenced Townsend. The minutes *536 do not reflect that the trial judge ruled on the motion for a new trial.

¶7LSA-R.S. 14:123 provides that a motion for a new trial must be filed and disposed of before imposing sentence on a defendant. Therefore, we must vacate Townsend's sentence and remand his case to the trial court for consideration of the motion for a new trial. Townsend's right to appeal his conviction and sentence is reserved in the event of an unfavorable ruling by the trial court. See State v. Randolph,409 So.2d 554 (La. 1981); State v. Camou,633 So.2d 357 (La. App. 1st Cir.1993).

¶8SENTENCE VACATED, REMANDED TO THE TRIAL COURT FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.

/647/so2d/535 · .json · Public domain