# State v. Hingle

> Supreme Court of Louisiana · March 26, 1962 · 242 La. 844

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9537144

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE of Louisiana v. Marcel HINGLE Alias “Moose” Hingle
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Louisiana
- **Decided:** March 26, 1962
- **Citations:** 242 La. 844; 139 So. 2d 205; 1962 La. LEXIS 493
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Fournet
- **Judges:** Sanders, Fournet, McCaleb
- **Cited by:** 41 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9537144

## Opinion text

FOURNET, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
I am in full accord with the views expressed by Mr. Justice McCALEB in his dissenting opinion to the effect that the district attorney has full control of all prosecutions and it is within his sole province to determine whether he will prosecute or not, the trial judge’s consent in this respect being entirely unnecessary.
Even were I to concede, however, the correctness of the majority view that the trial judge’s consent is necessary, I cannot agree with the conclusion that the sentence of the defendant- — a multiple offender —is null and void in the instant case simply because the trial judge overlooked or failed to carry out his mandatory duty to vacate the previous sentence imposed and deduct from the new one the time the defendant actually served under the first. It is my opinion that in such a case it would not only be the province, but the duty, of this court to vacate the first or previous sentence, and then remand the case to- the lower court for the sole purpose of having determined by it the time actually served by the defendant under the previous sentence so that such time might be deducted by the trial court from the term of the final sentence.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9537144. Public record. Not legal advice.