86 So. 3d 872
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- Defendant Kenneth G. Billingsley was convicted by a jury of armed robbery with the use of a firearm under La.R.S. 14:64 and 14:64.3.
- He was adjudicated a second felony offender under La.R.S. 15:529.1 and sentenced to 75 years at hard labor, without probation, parole, or suspension, consecutive to a 7-year probation-violation sentence.
- On appeal, Billingsley challenged his sentence as excessive; the appellate court found the excessive-sentence claim moot because the sentence must be vacated and resentenced.
- The court identified a patent error regarding the habitual-offender sentence under La.Code Crim.P. art. 920 and reviewed the implications of 14:64.3.
- The trial court failed to impose a separate five-year term under 14:64.3 to run consecutively to the habitual-offender sentence, creating an indeterminate sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the habitual-offender sentence must be vacated and remanded for resentencing | Billingsley argues the sentence is indeterminate and must be corrected | State contends resentencing is unnecessary beyond proper 14:64.3 enhancement | Yes; habitual-offender sentence vacated and remanded for proper resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. King, 969 So.2d 1228 (La. 2007) (approval of adding 14:64.3 five-year enhancement when weapon is firearm)
- State v. McGinnis, 981 So.2d 881 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2008) (requires explicit specification of 14:64.3 enhancement to avoid indeterminate sentence)