Legal Opinion

State v. Arnold

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided October 6, 2000No. 00-KP-0570PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Writ Granted. The Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, erred in its analysis of defendant’s claim of a double jeopardy violation. Defendant, who has entered an unconditional guilty plea, can only attack the convictions on double jeopardy grounds if he shows a double jeopardy violation on the face of the pleadings or record. La. Code Crim.Proc. art. 930.2; United States v. Broce, 488 U.S. 563, 575-76, 109 S.Ct. 757, 102 L.Ed.2d 927 (1989); State ex rel. Boyd v. State, 98-0378 (La.10/9/98), 720 So.2d 667; State ex rel. Adams v. Butler, 558 So.2d 552, 553 n. 1 (La.1990); cf. State v. Texada, 98-1647…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. United States v. BroceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. State Ex Rel. Adams v. ButlerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1990
  3. State v. TexadaLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1999
  4. State Ex Rel. Boyd v. StateSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1998

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. ArnoldLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2001
  2. State v. HayesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2002
  3. State v. WilsonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API