State v. McKnightState v. McKnight
Defendant was charged with the shooting death of his estranged wife. The couple had been separated for several weeks, and the victim had moved to Baton Rouge from Amite, Louisiana, along with the couple‘s children. Defendant claimed that the gun went off accidentally as he was attempting to give the gun to his wife. He was indicted for the crime of second degree murder, a violation of
ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR
Defendant alleges the following errors in the imposition of his sentence:
1. The trial court erred by failing to sufficiently articulate the reasons for the sentence under
La.C.Cr.P. art. 894.1 .2. The court erred in its interpretation of
La.C.Cr.P. art. 893.1 .3. The court imposed an excessive sentence.
4. The court erred by imposing a two year sentence under
La.R.S. 14:95.2 .
Assignment of error number four was not briefed and is not error patent on the face of the record. It is therefore considered abandoned on appeal.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER ONE:
Defendant alleges that the trial court erred by imposing sentence without regard to applicable mitigating factors. The trial court, in sentencing defendant, noted for the record what he believed to be mitigating factors such as his belief defendant was not likely to commit another crime. He also went thoroughly into defendant‘s past record noting what he was and was not considering for sentencing purposes. He also noted that because of the seriousness of the crime, he felt that a lessor sentence would deprecate the seriousness of the incident. The record reflects the trial judge gave due consideration to relevant sentencing factors. It is not necessary for the trial judge to enumerate every factor under
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER TWO:
In this assignment of error, defendant alleges that the trial court erred by imposing a sentence of 18 years without the benefit of probation, parole or suspension of sentence under
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR NUMBER THREE:
Defendant argues that the sentence imposed is excessive. Defendant was convicted for the taking of a human life with a firearm. A minimum sentence of 5 years without suspension and without benefit of parole or probation was necessary. Another two years without these benefits, to run consecutively with the sentence imposed, was also required under
For the foregoing reasons we affirm the sentence of the trial court.
AFFIRMED.
ON APPLICATION FOR REHEARING
PER CURIAM.
The decision of this court was rendered and mailed on February 28, 1984. This application for rehearing was filed on March 26, 1984. Pursuant to
This rehearing is granted solely for the purpose of vacating our patent error ruling. After the decision was handed down, the trial judge below informed this court that the $50.00 was assessed not as a fine under
In all other respects, the rehearing is denied.
Notes
Art. 893.1. Use of firearm in commission of a felony; sentencing
When the court makes a finding that a firearm was used in the commission of a felony and when suspension of sentence is not otherwise prohibited, the court shall impose a sentence which is not less than:
(1) The maximum sentence provided by law, in the same manner as provided in the offense, if the maximum sentence is less than five years, or
(2) Five years, in the same manner as provided in the offense, if the maximum sentence is five years or more.
Imposition or execution of sentence shall not be suspended and the offender shall not be eligible for probation or parole. (footnotes omitted)