Cecil C. Lowe

Judge, Louisiana Court of Appeal · Born 1923

Decision record

Newest first · every case links to the full record

State v. Bostic
Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1994-05-04 · cited 13×
In State v. Bostic, the defendant was charged with possession of marijuana with intent to distribute after a traffic stop on Interstate 20 for speeding led to a consented search of his motor home revealing approximately 750 pounds of the drug; the conspiracy charge was dropped, and he was convicted by jury and sentenced to eleven years at hard labor plus a fine. Bostic appealed, arguing that the stop was a pretextual violation of his rights, his continued detention illegal, his consent invalid, the motion to suppress should have been granted, subpoenas improperly quashed, and the sentence excessive due to improper deviation from sentencing guidelines. The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the initial stop was objectively justified by the observed speeding violation regardless of any subjective motive, the consent to search was voluntary, and the large quantity of marijuana constituted a sufficient aggravating circumstance to support an upward departure from the guidelines while remaining within statutory limits.
criminal lawprocedure
State v. Desormeaux
Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1990-10-31 · cited 10×
The case involved Leo T. Desormeaux, who pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine while reserving his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized during an early-morning encounter with a deputy sheriff on a highway. The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion, concluding that the deputy did not make a forcible stop and that the cocaine came into plain view when the defendant voluntarily placed a jacket and papers on the ground. The court reasoned that the initial stop was for welfare assistance, the officer's requests and observations were reasonable for safety, the encounter was brief, and the discovery was inadvertent rather than the result of an unconstitutional search.
criminal lawprocedure

Judicial data via CourtListener (Free Law Project). Social links via Wikidata.

Decision record

Newest first · every case links to the full record

State v. Bostic
Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1994-05-04 · cited 13×
In State v. Bostic, the defendant was charged with possession of marijuana with intent to distribute after a traffic stop on Interstate 20 for speeding led to a consented search of his motor home revealing approximately 750 pounds of the drug; the conspiracy charge was dropped, and he was convicted by jury and sentenced to eleven years at hard labor plus a fine. Bostic appealed, arguing that the stop was a pretextual violation of his rights, his continued detention illegal, his consent invalid, the motion to suppress should have been granted, subpoenas improperly quashed, and the sentence excessive due to improper deviation from sentencing guidelines. The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the initial stop was objectively justified by the observed speeding violation regardless of any subjective motive, the consent to search was voluntary, and the large quantity of marijuana constituted a sufficient aggravating circumstance to support an upward departure from the guidelines while remaining within statutory limits.
criminal lawprocedure
State v. Desormeaux
Louisiana Court of Appeal · 1990-10-31 · cited 10×
The case involved Leo T. Desormeaux, who pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine while reserving his right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized during an early-morning encounter with a deputy sheriff on a highway. The Louisiana Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion, concluding that the deputy did not make a forcible stop and that the cocaine came into plain view when the defendant voluntarily placed a jacket and papers on the ground. The court reasoned that the initial stop was for welfare assistance, the officer's requests and observations were reasonable for safety, the encounter was brief, and the discovery was inadvertent rather than the result of an unconstitutional search.
criminal lawprocedure