Case Name: STATE of Louisiana, Appellee, v. Mark Anthony JACKSON, Appellant
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1993-08-18
Citations: 622 So. 2d 1224
Docket Number: No. 25,141-KA
Parties: STATE of Louisiana, Appellee, v. Mark Anthony JACKSON, Appellant.
Judges: Before HIGHTOWER, BROWN and STEWART, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 622
Pages: 1224–1225

Head Matter:
STATE of Louisiana, Appellee, v. Mark Anthony JACKSON, Appellant.
No. 25,141-KA.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.
Aug. 18, 1993.
Jacqueline Scott, Bossier City, for appellant.
Richard Ieyoub, Atty. Gen., James M. Bullers, Dist. Atty., Robert R. Smith and J. Spencer Hays, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appel-lee.
Before HIGHTOWER, BROWN and STEWART, JJ.

Opinion:
STEWART, Judge.
Defendant, Mark Jackson, charged with aggravated battery and distribution of cocaine arising from separate incidents, was allowed to plead guilty to attempted distribution of cocaine and the other charge was dismissed. He appeals his six-year sentence as excessive. We affirm.
The evidence of record shows that on July 16, 1991, Jackson sold one rock of crack cocaine valued at $20 to an undercover police officer who had been introduced to him by a confidential informant. The sale occurred at the Village Manor Apartments near Haughton in Bossier Parish. Laboratory analysis confirmed that the substance was cocaine.
LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 881.1 became effective January 31, 1992, and is applicable to Jackson's December 1, 1992 sentence. This article precludes Jackson from raising an objection to the sentence or from urging any grounds not raised in a motion to reconsider sentence on appeal or review. We do not read the Louisiana Supreme Court's recent opinion in State v. Mims, 619 So.2d 1059 (La.1993), as having obviated this statutory requirement that a motion to reconsider sentence be filed in order to preserve a claim of excessive sentence for appellate review. Because Jackson failed to move for reconsideration, he is barred from attacking his sentence on appeal. State v. Bush, 604 So.2d 1383 (La.App. 2d Cir.1992); State v. Woods, 619 So.2d 803 (La.App. 1st Cir.1993); State v. Moore, 614 So.2d 145 (La.App. 3d Cir.1993); State v. Hudson, 618 So.2d 539 (La.App. 4th Cir.1993); State v. Goff, 608 So.2d 1067 (La.App. 5th Cir. 1992).
We have examined the record for error patent and found none.
Accordingly, the conviction and sentence are affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
BROWN, J., concurs with written reasons.