State v. Celestine, 92 So. 3d 335

Defendant, 18, was convicted of armed robbery under La. R.S. 14:64.
Trial court and court of appeal sought a sentence below the 10-year mandatory minimum.
Defendant had strong mitigating factors: exemplary student, National Honor Society, drum major, and first offender.
Defendant suffered mental illness and depression; there was evidence of attempted suicide; he did not physically harm the victims.
The prosecution argued the mandatory minimum is appropriate; the defense urged downward departure based on circumstances; the trial court indicated it would have imposed a lesser sentence if allowed.
The Court reinstates the sentence and remands for execution, affirming conviction but reversing the departure remand.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court could depart from the mandatory minimum	State argued legislature sets minimums not to be surpassed	Celestine framework allows downward departure for exceptional circumstances	No, Court reinstates minimum but acknowledges mitigating factors.
Whether appellate downward departure was proper	State contends no basis to depart from minimum	Defendant's background warranted departure under Dorthey/Johnson	Partially reversed; conviction upheld, downward departure not sustained.
Whether the sentence as applied was excessive given the circumstances	State maintains minimum reflects offense gravity	Mitigating factors warranted lesser penalty	Sentence reinstated as within constitutional scope; no substitution of judge’s view.
What guidance the resentencing court should follow on remand	State seeks compliance with minimum	Trial court can consider mitigating factors	Remand for execution of reinstated sentence; guidance limited.

State v. Celestine, 11-0752, — So.3d — (La. 2011) (downward departure for exceptional circumstances (unpub’d))
State v. Dorthey, 623 So.2d 1276 (La.1993) (establishes when trial court may depart from mandatory minimum)
State v. Johnson, 709 So.2d 672 (La.1998) (framework for determining departure from minimum)
State v. Square, 433 So.2d 104 (La.1983) (midpoint or range considerations for armed robbery sentence)
State v. Huntsberry, 409 So.2d 555 (La.1982) (longstanding sentences up to 50 years for armed robbery)
State v. Dunns, 404 So.2d 1235 (La.1981) (precedent on remand and punishment range)
Sullivan v. Maggio, 432 So.2d 854 (La.1983) (armed robbery is pernicious; high sentencing concern)
Kelly v. State, 95-2335, 666 So.2d 1082 (La.1996) (legislative prerogative governs offenses and punishments)