Case Name: STATE of Louisiana, Respondent, v. Michael Lovell ALEXANDER, Relator
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1979-10-08
Citations: 376 So. 2d 146
Docket Number: No. 64664
Parties: STATE of Louisiana, Respondent, v. Michael Lovell ALEXANDER, Relator.
Judges: TATE, J., dissents and assigns reasons.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 376
Pages: 146–147

Head Matter:
STATE of Louisiana, Respondent, v. Michael Lovell ALEXANDER, Relator.
No. 64664.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
Oct. 8, 1979.
James D, Sparks, Jr., Monroe, for defendant-relator.
William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., J. Carl Parker-son, Dist. Atty., Allen W. Helm, III, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The issue before us is whether, for a limited period following affirmance of an appealed conviction, the sentencing judge retains jurisdiction to modify a legal sentence not imposed by reason of any error of law.
The defendant was convicted of armed robbery, La.R.S. 14:64, and sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment at hard labor. His conviction and sentence were affirmed, and his application for rehearing was denied on January 26, 1979. 365 So.2d 1337.
On February 1, five days later, he filed a motion in the trial court for reduction of sentence. (He pointed out that a co-defendant of equal culpability received a lesser sentence. We do not consider whether this constituted an adequate reason for the trial court to reconsider its previous sentence, only its power or jurisdiction to do so.)
The trial court denied the motion. It felt that it no longer had jurisdiction to modify the sentence imposed on April 4, 1978, which had been appealed.
We granted certiorari, 371 So.2d 1340 (1979), to consider whether the trial court may still amend the legal sentence since request was made "prior to the beginning of the execution of the sentence" La.C.Cr.P. art. 881.
A majority of the court has concluded that the trial court's jurisdiction to amend the sentence is limited by La.C.Cr.P. art. 916, which divests the trial court of jurisdiction to amend the sentence, except under limited circumstances — to correct an illegal sentence, or to allow credit for all or part of the time served pending the appeal. La.C.Cr.P. art. 916(3); see also, La.C.Cr.P. arts. 881 and 913(B). We find that the legislative intent there expressed is that, while a trial judge retains jurisdiction to modify an unappealed legal sentence prior to commencement of its execution, he is divested of that jurisdiction by an appeal which affirms the sentence. See Official Revision Comment, La.C.Cr.P. art. 881.
Accordingly, we affirm the ruling of the trial court.
AFFIRMED.
TATE, J., dissents and assigns reasons.
CALOGERO and DENNIS, JJ., dissent.
. Article 881 provides in full: "Although the sentence imposed is legal in every respect, the court may amend or change the sentence, within the legal limits of its discretion, prior to the beginning of execution of the sentence.