Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Maise, 805 So. 2d 1141.

69 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Darrion A. Brown La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. Carlos M. Smith La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
1/15/02), n. 5, citing Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 307-11, 111 S. Ct. 1246, 1264-65, 113 L. Ed. 2d 302 (1991).
State v. Bibbins 258 So. 3d 134 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
1/15/02), , 1151, overruled on other grounds by State v. Bernard , 09-1178, p. 7 (La.
State of Louisiana v. Jeffery Lynn Jones La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
1/15/02), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Bernard, 09-1178 (La.
State v. Jones 254 So. 3d 1221 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
1/15/02), , overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Bernard , 09-1178 (La.
State v. Contreras 247 So. 3d 858 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Dixon 241 So. 3d 514 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
1/15/02), , 1152 , overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Bernard , 09-1178 (La.
State v. Copelin 206 So. 3d 990 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
1/15/02), , 1148 n. 5, citing Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. [279] at 307-311, 111 S.Ct.
State v. Farry 206 So. 3d 1222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
1/15/02), -1148 ; State v. Tyler, 97-0338, p. 14 (La.
State of Louisiana v. William Chester Farry Jr. AKA William Chester Farry AKA William C. Farry AKA William … La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
See, State v. Maise, 00-1158, pp. 8-9 (La.1/15/02), -1148; State v. Tyler, 97-0338, p. 14 (La.9/9/98), State v. Johnson, 94-1379, p. 15 (La.11/27/95)
State v. Bell 178 So. 3d 234 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
In State v. Maise, 00-1158, pp. 15-16 (La.1/15/02), , the supreme court affirmed this Court’s determination that the trial court’s failure to give a limiting instruction before one of the witnesses’ testimony about the defendant’s prior conviction was a trial error.
State v. Bell 179 So. 3d 683 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
State v. Maine, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), , citing State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01), ; State v. Smith, 35,699 (La.App.2d Cir.4/5/02), .
State v. Greenberry 154 So. 3d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
See State v. Maise, 00-1158, p. 8-9 (La.1/15/02), -48 .
State v. Webb 133 So. 3d 258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Diggins 126 So. 3d 770 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
“The testimony of a police officer may encompass information provided by another individual without constituting hearsay, if it is offered to explain the course of the police investigation and the steps leading to the defendant’s arrest.” State v. Maise, 00-1158, p. 17 (La.1/15/02), , overruled on other grounds by State v. Bernard, 09-1178, p. 7 (La.3/16/10), ; see State v. Legendre, 05-1469, pp. 11-14 (La.App.
State v. Hamdalla 126 So. 3d 619 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
See State v. Maise, 00-1158, p. 8 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Sanders 104 So. 3d 619 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Maise, 00-1158, p. 17 (La.1/15/02), ; State v. Tyler, 97-0338, p. 14 (La.9/9/98), ; State v. Johnson, 94-1379, p. 15 (La.11/27/95), .
State v. Barnes 100 So. 3d 926 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Maise, 2000-1158 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Everett 96 So. 3d 605 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Maise, 00-1158, p. 17 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Hernandez 93 So. 3d 615 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Maise, 2000-1158, p. 17, (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Ruffin 82 So. 3d 497 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
See State v. Maise, 2000-1158, p. 14 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Odenbaugh 82 So. 3d 215 La. 2011
See, State v. Maise, 00-1158, pp. 8-9 (La.1/15/02), -1148 ; State v. Tyler, 97-0338, p. 14 (La.9/9/98), ; State v. Johnson, 94-1379, p. 15 (La.11/27/95), .
State Ex Rel. Dw 47 So. 3d 1048 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2010
State v. Galliano, 05-962 at 37-38, 945 So.2d at 726 , citing, State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02); .
State v. Morgan 34 So. 3d 1127 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.2002), .
State v. Bernard 31 So. 3d 1025 La. 2010
|f;A- Miranda vis-d-vis State Employees Defendant argues that, pursuant to State v. Maise, 2000-1141 (La.1/15/02) , all “state actors” who interview or interrogate a suspect must give Miranda warnings.
State v. Lawrence 32 So. 3d 329 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Sumlin 25 So. 3d 931 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
State v. Maise, 2000-1158 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Bernard 13 So. 3d 611 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
The Louisiana Supreme Court has reiterated that Miranda only applies where the party performing the “interrogation” is a “state actor.” State v. Maise, 2000-1158, p. 10 (La.1/15/02), .
State in the Interest of J.E. T. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State ex rel. J.E.T. 10 So. 3d 1264 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
2560, 2572 , 61 L.Ed.2d 197 (1979).” State v. Maise, 00-1158, p. 12 (La.1/15/02), .
State Ex Rel. Jet 10 So. 3d 1264 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State v. Maise, 00-1158, p. 12 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Langston 3 So. 3d 707 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Ridgley 7 So. 3d 689 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
See: State v. Maise, 00-1158, p. 14 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Reed 1 So. 3d 561 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Reed 1 So. 3d 561 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), .
Wyatt v. Hendrix 998 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
2641 , 171 L.Ed.2d 525 (2008); State v. Maise, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/15/02), ; Edwards v. Sawyer Indus.
State v. Caston 996 So. 2d 480 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), , citing State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01), ; State v. Smith, 35,699 (La.App.2d Cir.4/5/02), .
State v. Franks 975 So. 2d 836 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), ; State v. Gulley, 42,237 (La.App.2d Cir.8/15/07), .
State v. Brister 966 So. 2d 1249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State v. Gage 965 So. 2d 592 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Gulley 963 So. 2d 1063 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
See State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.01/15/02), .
State v. Ruiz 955 So. 2d 81 La. 2007
State v. Maise, XXXX-XXXX, p. 8 n. 5 (La.1/15/02), , 1148 n. 5, citing Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. at 307-311 , 111 S.Ct.
State v. Greene 951 So. 2d 1226 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
4 Cir. 3/24/04) , , where Dr. Wetsman was previously qualified as an expert in forensic pediatrics; State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), ; State v. Barnes, 01-113 (La.App.
State v. Smith 952 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
State v. Maise, XXXX-XXXX, pp. 8-9 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Legendre 942 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
State v. Maise, XXXX-XXXX, p. 17, (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Galliano 945 So. 2d 701 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
2078, 2081 , 124 L.Ed.2d 182 (1993); State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Davis 935 So. 2d 763 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
The court in State v. Maise, 2000-1158 (La.1/15/02), , stated: Assuming that the evidence was improperly admitted, we must consider whether the admission of the evidence was unattributable to the verdict.
State v. Wright 931 So. 2d 432 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
State v. Maise, XXXX-XXXX (La.01/15/02)
State v. Jackson 926 So. 2d 72 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
App. 5 Cir. 3/22/00), , writ granted, 00-1158 (La.9/14/01), , judgment aff'd, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), .
State v. Lagarde 917 So. 2d 623 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
[14] State v. Maise, 00-1158 (La.1/15/02), -1149 , citations omitted.