Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Wiley, 513 So. 2d 849.
- State of Louisiana v. Billy Ray Ford, Jr. La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2024
-
State of Louisiana v. Ray Donald Brister, Jr.
La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
9) (holding that a defendant’s emotional distress following stabbing of former husband was not so severe as to render subsequent confession involuntary; although evidence indicated that defendant had consumed beer previously, officers testified that she exhibited no signs of intoxication, she was not hysterical, and was sufficiently rational to be concerned for granddaughter); (La.App.
- State of Louisiana v. David Billy Parker, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
-
State v. Parker
258 So. 3d 883
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
See also State v. Wiley , (La.App.
-
State v. Lundy
195 So. 3d 587
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
9)(holding that a defendant’s emotional distress following stabbing of former husband was riot so severe as to render subsequent confession involuntary; although evidence indicated that defendant had consumed beer previously, officers testified that she exhibited no signs of intoxication, she was not hysterical, and was sufficiently rational to be concerned for granddaughter); (La.App.
- State of Louisiana v. Ronald Pete La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
- State v. Pete 134 So. 3d 196 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
- State of Louisiana v. Marcus Deangelo Tennors La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
- State v. Tennors 923 So. 2d 823 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
- State v. George 855 So. 2d 861 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
- State v. Amin 839 So. 2d 262 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
-
State v. Plaisance
745 So. 2d 784
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Analogous to the present case, (La.App.
- State v. Mohamed 700 So. 2d 881 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
- State v. Timon 683 So. 2d 315 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
-
State v. Ellis
677 So. 2d 617
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
State v. Collier, supra; (La.App.
- State v. Hattaway 674 So. 2d 380 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
-
State v. Maxie
653 So. 2d 526
La. 1995
4th Cir.1991), writ denied, (La.App.
-
State v. Jackson
629 So. 2d 1374
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
Although mere inconvenience is not grounds for challenging a juror, writ denied, the defense argues that the probable loss of sleep created impartiality, as enumerated at LSA-C.Cr.P.
-
State v. Jackson
629 So. 2d 1374
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
Although mere inconvenience is not grounds for challenging a juror, writ denied, the defense argues that the probable loss of sleep created impartiality, as enumerated at LSA-C.Cr.P.
- State v. Williams 617 So. 2d 557 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
-
State v. Perow
616 So. 2d 1336
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
1487 , 67 L.Ed.2d 618 (1981); (La.App.
- State v. Dukes 609 So. 2d 1144 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
-
State v. Hicks
607 So. 2d 937
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
1487 , 67 L.Ed.2d 618 (1981); writ denied, (La.
-
State v. Crandell
604 So. 2d 123
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
So is a perceived lack of interest or unresponsiveness, (La.App.
- State v. Hill 601 So. 2d 684 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
-
State v. Washington
597 So. 2d 1084
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
115 , 74 L.Ed.2d 101 (1982); (La.App.
-
State v. Washington
597 So. 2d 1084
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
115 , 74 L.Ed.2d 101 (1982); (La.App.
- State v. Tucker 591 So. 2d 1208 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
-
State v. Moseley
587 So. 2d 46
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
App. 2d Cir.1989), writ denied, (La.App.
- State v. Myers 583 So. 2d 67 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
- State v. Jackson 568 So. 2d 599 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
-
State v. Johnson
561 So. 2d 922
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
517 , 102 L.Ed.2d 551 (1988); U.S. v. Williams, 822 F.2d 512 (5th Cir.1987), a perceived lack of interest or unresponsiveness, (La.App.
-
State v. Hall
549 So. 2d 373
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
115 , 74 L.Ed.2d 101 (1982); (La.App.
-
State v. Taylor
545 So. 2d 1237
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
writ denied, a similar factual situation was presented.
-
State v. McKnight
539 So. 2d 952
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
2d Cir.1984), writ denied (La.App.
- State v. Collins 535 So. 2d 973 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
-
State v. Smith
535 So. 2d 786
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
The prosecutor’s (La.App.