State v. Payne, 59 So. 3d 1287

Carl Payne was convicted by jury on four counts: possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, possession with intent to distribute heroin, unlawful possession of body armor, and possession of alprazolam.
A prior habitual offender bill alleged Payne was a third felony offender based on a prior heroin possession-for-distribution conviction and prior cocaine, armed robbery, and aggravated battery convictions.
The trial court vacated an original 30-year sentence for the heroin-with-intent-to-distribute count and imposed a 50-year enhanced sentence under the multiple-offender statute, all to run concurrently.
Payne challenged the multiple-offender adjudication and claimed the predicate pleas were defective, including Boykinization and advisement of maximum exposure and the potential for future multiple billing.
A suppression hearing denied Payne’s motion; evidence obtained from a search of Payne’s residence at 1445 Lincoln Avenue was admitted at trial.
The appellate court affirmed Payne’s convictions and adjudication as a third offender, amended the enhanced sentence to remove an improper parole prohibition, and remanded for correction of the commitment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Excessive sentence for counts and third offender status	Payne argues sentences are excessive.	Court abused discretion in sentencing.	No; enhanced sentence not grossly disproportionate.
Motion to suppress evidence	Suppression should be granted for lack of probable cause.	Probable cause established by controlled buy and affidavit.	Denied; probable cause supported warrant.
Multiple offender adjudication sufficiency	Predicate convictions defective; Boykin requirements violated.	State proved prior convictions and voluntariness of pleas.	Payne properly adjudicated as third felony offender.
Errors patent and sentence amendment	Parole prohibition and advisement errors.		Amendment of enhanced sentence; parole prohibition removed; convictions affirmed as amended.

State v. Lanieux, 42 So.3d 979 (La.App.5 Cir. 2010) (habitual offender proof and Boykin issues; admissibility of guilty pleas)
State v. Woods, 38 So.3d 391 (La.App.5 Cir. 2010) (Boykin and predicate-conviction principles in habitual offender contexts)
State v. Dee, 34 So.3d 892 (La.App.5 Cir. 2010) (patent errors in sentencing calculations; parole considerations)
State v. Major, 26 So.3d 289 (La.App.5 Cir. 2009) (probative value of evidence in search-and-seizure rulings)
State v. Grant, 887 So.2d 596 (La.App.5 Cir. 2004) (guidance on sentencing exposure and plea proceedings)
State v. Casey, 775 So.2d 1022 (La. 2000) (probable cause and four-corners test for warrants)