State v. Johnson

Decision Date05 November 1951
Docket NumberNo. 40353,40353
Citation55 So.2d 782,220 La. 64
PartiesSTATE v. JOHNSON.
CourtLouisiana Supreme Court

Gravel & Downs, Alexandria, for relators.

Bolivar E. Kemp, Jr., Atty. Gen., M. E. Culligan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Ben F. Thompson, Dist. Atty., Geo. M. Foote, Asst. Dist. Atty., Alexandria, for respondent.

HAWTHORNE, Justice.

The defendant in this case, as well as defendants in six other cases, was charged in the Ninth Judicial District Court for the Parish of Rapides with the offense of false or illegal registration, etc., denounced by LSA-R.S. 18:222. In each of these cases immediately after the verdict and the imposition of sentence the defendants applied for, and were granted, writs by this court solely for the purpose of reviewing the legality of the sentences actually imposed. The defendant in the instant case was given the following sentence: 'I sentence you, Jesse Johnson, to serve six months in Parish Jail, subject to work, and suspend all of same except three months thereof, upon good behavior.'

Article 536 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, LSA-R.S. 15:536, provides insofar as pertinent: 'Whenever any person has been found guilty of a misdemeanor in any court, the judge may sentence the defendant but suspend such sentence and release the offender during his good behavior; provided further, that the judge may suspend the sentence in the manner set forth in this article although the prisoner has been incarcerated and actually begun to serve the sentence imposed. * * *'

Under the provisions of this article, after a defendant has been adjudged guilty the judge may do two things: (1) He may sentence the defendant to serve a time in prison and suspend the sentence thus imposed during good behavior, or (2) after the prisoner has been incarcerated under the sentence imposed and actually begun to serve the sentence the judge may suspend the balance of the sentence not served during good behavior. The statute does not permit or authorize the judge at the time the sentence is actually imposed to impose a sentence for a fixed term and at the same time suspend a portion thereof. As pointed out by this court in Cox v. Brown, 211 La. 235, 29 So.2d 776, 778, 'The judge did not have the right to limit the suspension of the sentence to any fixed time, as Article 536 authorizes only the suspension of the entire sentence or the remaining part which has not been served by the prisoner. * * *'

In any criminal case it is the mandatory duty of the district judge upon conviction of a defendant to impose a sentence authorized or directed by law, and, if he does not impose a sentence authorized or directed by law, the sentence is illegal, and the case is in the same condition as if no sentence at all has been imposed, and it must be remanded to the district court so that the judge may impose a legal sentence. State v. Nicholson, 14 La.Ann. 785; State v. Williams, 114 La. 940, 38 So. 686; State v. Stein, 157 La. 562, 102 So. 670; State v. Carson, 160 La. 1, 106 So. 653; State v. Blakeney, 164 La. 669, 114 So. 588; State ex rel. Cutrer v. Pitcher, 164 La. 1051, 115 So. 187; State ex rel. Pierre v. Jones, 200 La. 808, 9 So.2d 42; State v. Broussard, 202 La. 458, 12 So.2d 218; State v. Gros, 205 La. 935, 18 So.2d 507; State v. Baggott, 212 La. 795, 33 So.2d 523.

Relator contends in brief that 'A...

To continue reading

Request your trial
59 cases
  • State v. Williams, 2000-K-1725.
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • November 28, 2001
    ...than an illegal sentence is "no sentence at all," State v. Rome, 96-0991 (La.7/1/97), 696 So.2d 976, 981, quoting State v.Johnson, 220 La. 64, 55 So.2d 782, 784 (1951). Accordingly, we routinely required a remand for re-sentencing with full procedural safeguards including the presence of th......
  • State v. O'Conner
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • September 21, 2012
    ...that in the view of the law, the effect of an illegal sentence is the same as if no sentence at all had been imposed. See State v. Johnson. 220 La. 64, 68, 55 So. 2d 782, 783-84 (1951). However, in this case, the parties themselves agreed to a sentence within the statutory guidelines, which......
  • State v. Mack, No. 08-487 (La. App. 11/5/2008), 08-487.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • November 5, 2008
    ...(La.3/30/95), 651 So.2d 858, this court stated: "An illegal sentence is one not `authorized or directed by law.' State v. Johnson, 220 La. 64, 55 So.2d 782 (1951)." In State v. Gedric, 99-1213, p. 3 (La.App. 1 Cir. 6/3/99), 741 So.2d 849, 851-52, writ denied, 99-1830 (La.11/5/99), 751 So.2d......
  • State v. Price
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana — District of US
    • December 28, 2006
    ...an illegal sentence at any time, for an illegal sentence is, in the contemplation of the law, no sentence at all. State v. Johnson, 220 La. 64, 68, 55 So.2d 782, 784 (1951). (Emphasis The majority declines to correct the illegally lenient sentence, since it is favorable to the defendant. Ho......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT