CRIMINAL/SENTENCING: Provides relative to the time period between conviction and sentencing (EN DECREASE LF EX See Note)
Summary
HB 289 amends Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 873, which governs the delay between a felony conviction and sentencing. The bill keeps the existing rule that at least three days must pass between conviction and sentence in felony cases. It also keeps the rule that if a defendant files a motion for a new trial or a motion in arrest of judgment, sentencing must wait until after that motion is resolved.
The main change in the bill is to remove the separate 24-hour waiting period that currently applies after such a motion is overruled. Under the bill, once the motion is denied, sentencing may proceed without that additional delay, unless the defendant has not waived a delay that otherwise applies. The bill also preserves the ability for a defendant to expressly waive the delay or plead guilty and be sentenced immediately.
Impact
HB 289 narrows the mandatory waiting period before sentencing in felony cases by eliminating the 24-hour delay after denial of a motion for new trial or motion in arrest of judgment. It leaves intact the general three-day delay between conviction and sentencing and the rule requiring resolution of post-trial motions before sentence is imposed. The bill amends Code of Criminal Procedure Article 873 and affects criminal defendants, prosecutors, defense counsel, and trial courts by allowing sentencing to occur sooner in some cases.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows strong support for the bill, with the House passing final passage 91-0. No committee transcript is available, but the unanimous vote suggests the measure was viewed as a procedural adjustment rather than a controversial policy change. The bill was ultimately signed by the Governor as Act 634, indicating it received broad acceptance through the legislative process.
Contention
The only apparent point of contention is the reduction of the post-motion waiting period before sentencing, which could be seen as limiting additional time for defense preparation or reflection after a motion is denied. However, no recorded debate or dissent is available in the provided materials, and the unanimous House vote suggests any concerns were not significant enough to generate opposition. The bill otherwise preserves existing sentencing-delay protections and allows waiver by the defendant.