Court Opinion

ID: 9780167
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 01:27:32.255164+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:33:58.288310
License: Public Domain

THIBODEAUX, Chief Judge,
concurring for additional reasons.
| ,1 write a separate concurrence to express the abandonment of my previous reliance on State v. R.W.W., 06-1253 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/7/07), 953 So.2d 131, which conditionally affirms a defendant’s conviction and sentence, but remands the case to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine the voluntariness of a plea. I now rely on the procedure utilized in this case based on State v. Clark, 97-1064 (La.App. 3 Cir. 4/1/98), 711 So.2d 738 and State v. Fuslier, 06-1438 (La.App. 3 Cir. 4/4/07), 954 So.2d 866. State v. Clark and State v. Fustier mandate a remand to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine the voluntariness of a plea without conditionally affirming the defendant’s conviction and sentence.
For the foregoing reasons, I additionally concur.