Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
State v. Hensley
Citations: 606 So. 2d 13; 1992 WL 236229Docket: 92-KA-292
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal; September 16, 1992; Louisiana; State Appellate Court
Charles Hensley appeals his fifteen-year hard labor sentence, which includes a $15,000 fine, following his conviction for distributing cocaine within 1000 feet of school property, as per Louisiana Revised Statutes (La. R.S.) 40:967(A)(1) and 981.3. The conviction arose from an undercover operation where Deputy Morse, acting on a tip from a confidential informant, purchased cocaine near the Chateau D'Ames apartments, located 245.57 feet from Lincoln Elementary School. During the trial, Deputy Morse identified Hensley as the seller, leading to a guilty verdict. Hensley challenges the legality of his sentence, arguing that La. R.S. 40:981.3(E)(1) is ambiguous regarding the minimum mandatory term of imprisonment, which could either refer to five years or the fifteen years he received. He asserts that this ambiguity should be construed against the state, citing State v. Russland Enterprises as precedent. The court ultimately amended the sentence and affirmed it, clarifying the legal interpretation. La. R.S. 14:3 prohibits the extension of criminal laws by analogy, mandating that all provisions be interpreted according to their clear meaning and context. La. R.S. 40:981.3, enacted by Acts 1989, No. 171, aims to establish zones for increased penalties for drug-related felonies near schools. This statute sets a mandatory minimum prison term of at least half the maximum for underlying offenses, with a stipulation that it cannot be less than the minimum in R.S. 40:966 through R.S. 40:970. Specifically, La. R.S. 40:981.3(E)(1) requires that this minimum term be served without parole, probation, or sentence suspension. The defendant argued for a five-year minimum based on La. R.S. 40:967(B)(1), while the state contended for a fifteen-year minimum from La. R.S. 40:967(A)(1) and 981.3. The court rejected the defendant's interpretation as inconsistent with the statute's intent, affirming that the minimum mandatory term is fifteen years at hard labor. The court also noted a lack of credit for time served in the trial transcript. Consequently, the defendant's sentence was amended to include credit for time served and was affirmed.