Case Name: STATE of Louisiana v. Johnny HAMPTON
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1973-03-08
Citations: 274 So. 2d 383
Docket Number: No. 53079
Parties: STATE of Louisiana v. Johnny HAMPTON.
Judges: 
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 274
Pages: 383–385

Head Matter:
STATE of Louisiana v. Johnny HAMPTON.
No. 53079.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
March 8, 1973.
Dissenting Opinion March 20, 1973.
John M. Stewart, Arcadia, for defendant-appellant.
William J. Guste, J.r., Atty. Gen., LeRoy A. Hartley, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Leon H. Whitten, Dist. Atty., J. Rush Wimberly II, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Defendant, Johnny Hampton, was tried by a jury and found guilty of attempted aggravated rape and sentenced to serve six (6) years in the state penitentiary. (La.R.S. 14:27 and 14:42.) On this appeal, the defendant relies on one bill of exceptions to obtain a reversal.
However, we do not consider this bill, because there is an error discoverable on the face of the proceedings which merits our attention. La.C.Cr.P. art. 920. The Minutes show that the sentence was imposed before the expiration of the mandatory statutory delay, and there is no minute entry or showing of a waiver of same — a patent error requiring remand. State v. Douglas, 250 La. 480, 196 So.2d 799 (1967); see also State v. Augustine, 263 La. 977, 270 So.2d 118, decided November 28, 1972.
La.Code of Criminal Procedure Article 873 provides:
"If a defendant is convicted of a felony, at least three days shall elapse between conviction and sentence. If a motion for a new trial, or in arrest of judgment, is filed, sentence shall not be imposed until at least twenty-four hours after the motion is overruled. If the defendant expressly waives a delay provided for in this article or pleads guilty, sentence may be imposed immediately."
Where the record does not disclose any waiver of the twenty-four hour delay in sentencing after the denial of the Motion for New Trial heard on March 3, 1972, and it is clear from the minutes that less than the mandatory delay had elapsed at the time of the sentencing, we note ex proprio motu, that the sentence is void, since imposed before expiration of the twenty-four hour delay and without waiver of same.
For these reasons, the sentence is annulled and set aside, and the case is remanded to the Second Judicial District Court for the Parish of Bienville, for re-sentencing in conformity with the law.