Case Name: STATE of Louisiana, Appellee, v. Andrew HAWKINS, Jr. and T.C. Williams, Jr., Appellants
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1993-03-31
Citations: 615 So. 2d 1367
Docket Number: No. 24690-KA
Parties: STATE of Louisiana, Appellee, v. Andrew HAWKINS, Jr. and T.C. Williams, Jr., Appellants.
Judges: Before LINDSAY, HIGHTOWER and BROWN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 615
Pages: 1367–1369

Head Matter:
STATE of Louisiana, Appellee, v. Andrew HAWKINS, Jr. and T.C. Williams, Jr., Appellants.
No. 24690-KA.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.
March 31, 1993.
Rehearings Denied April 29, 1993.
Lunn, Irion, Johnson, Salley & Carlisle by James A. Mijalis, Shreveport, for appellant, Andrew Hawkins, Jr.
Mayer, Smith & Roberts by Paul R. Mayer, Jr., Shreveport, for appellant T.C. Williams, Jr.
Richard Ieyoub, Atty. Gen., Baton Rouge, Paul Carmouche, Dist. Atty., Greg Munson, Asst. Dist. Atty., Shreveport, for appellee.
Before LINDSAY, HIGHTOWER and BROWN, JJ.

Opinion:
HIGHTOWER, Judge.
In response to a bill of information charging each defendant with two counts of armed robbery, LSA-R.S. 14:64, Andrew Hawkins, Jr. and T.C. Williams, Jr. individually pled guilty to one count of armed robbery. As part of the plea bargain, the state and the court agreed in each matter that the sentence would not exceed 25 years at hard labor without benefit of probation, parole or suspension. Additionally, the state dismissed the remaining charges, and declined to seek firearms enhancement penalties or to file multiple offender accusations against either defendant. Thereafter, the trial court imposed periods of imprisonment consistent with the plea agreement. After denial of their LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 881.1 motions to reconsider, Hawkins and Williams appeal as excessive their respective sentences of 20 years and 18 years. We affirm.
The Louisiana Felony Sentencing Guidelines became effective January 1, 1992, pri- or to the July 6, 1992 sentencings in this case. Despite their present assertions of excessiveness, the defendants cannot complain with respect to incarceration ordered within the limits of their plea agreement. As stated in LSA-C.Cr.P. Art. 881.2(A)(2):
The defendant cannot appeal or seek review of a sentence imposed in conformity with a plea agreement which was set forth in the record at the time of the plea.
See also La.S.G. § 301; State v. Brooks, 614 So.2d 788 (La.App. 2d Cir.1993).
As further explained in the Louisiana Sentencing Guidelines Manual, 1993 Edition, at pp. 9 and 10:
[N]o further justification is required under the Guidelines if a guilty plea agreement is reached by the parties and submitted to the court with a recommendation regarding a particular sentence or a range or "cap." [Footnote omitted.] The Guidelines and the 1991 implementing legislation adopt the view that a sentence in a particular case, which is acceptable to the prosecutor, defense counsel, and the trial court, should not be ' subjected to scrutiny by a reviewing court. [Footnote omitted.]
Here, based upon plea arrangements specifically set forth in the record, the state and defendants agreed to sentencing caps of 25 years at hard labor; and, the trial court accepted those plea bargains. Thus, defendants are now precluded from assailing, as excessive, sentences within a range to which they themselves assented.
For the foregoing reasons, the convictions and sentences of both defendants are affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
BROWN, J., concurs with reasons.