 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Curry12/15/2004
e fourth offense occurred before or after an earlier conviction . . . ." Additionally, there is jurisprudence dealing with whether two DWI offenses committed on separate dates and pled together constitute one or two offenses for charging purposes. Those cases hold that the noted language of the statute "evidences a clear intent by the Legislature that all prior DWI convictions be considered in determining the applicable penalty . . . and that it is the number of prior convictions, not their sequence, which determines the appropriate designation of a subsequent offense." State v. Woods, 402 So. 2d 680 (La. 1981); State v. Vu, 02-1243 (La. App. 5th Cir. 4/8/03), 846 So. 2d 67, 72.
We find that the provisions of La. R.S. 14:98 E clearly contemplate the use of DWI convictions obtained after the commission of another DWI offense for enhancement purposes. The state, therefore, appropriately utilized the September 15, 2003, fourth offense DWI as a predicate offense for Curry's present conviction. By his own admission, Curry received probation for fourth offense DWI on September 15, 2003. Because he had been previously given the benefit of probation on a fourth offense DWI, the provisions of La. R.S. 14:98 E (4)(b) require that the sentence on the present offense be imposed without benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence. On these grounds, the ten-year sentence is not illegal and Curry's assignment of error is without merit.
Curry's conviction and sentence are affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
|