DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Gomez, 778 So. 2d 549.

17 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Allen Joseph Fontenot La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
  • State of Louisiana v. Asa Bentley AKA - Asa N. Bentley La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
  • State v. Bentley 182 So. 3d 1269 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    87 , 145 L.Ed.2d 74 (1999), superceded by statute on other grounds as stated in State v. Gomez, 00-566 (La.1/17/01), .
  • State of Louisiana v. David Caleb Fontenot La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
    1/17/01), the supreme court stated as follows: This Court has recognized as a matter of well-settled law that the prosecutor has the right to “press upon the jury any view of the case arising out of the evidence—the Supreme Court is bound to credit jurors with common intelligence, conscientious
  • State v. Fontenot 160 So. 3d 609 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    87 , 145 L.Ed.2d 74 , superceded by statute on other grounds as stated in State v. Gomez, 00-566 (La.1/17/01), , the supreme court stated as follows: This Court has recognized as a matter of well-settled law that the prosecutor has the right to “press upon the jury any view of the case arising out of the evidence — the Supreme Court is bound to credit jurors with common intelligence, conscientiousness, and sense of duty.” Stat
  • State of Louisiana v. David Thomas Schwarz La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
    1/17/01), the supreme court stated: “the legislature has not expressly authorized testimony from mental health professionals as part of a victim-impact statement at sentencing in any criminal case.
  • State v. Schwarz 123 So. 3d 1256 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    In State v. Gomez, 00-566, 00-677 p. 7 (La.1/17/01), , the supreme court stated: “the legislature has not expressly authorized testimony from mental health professionals as part of a victim-impact statement at sentencing in any criminal case.
  • State v. McElveen 73 So. 3d 1033 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    art. 905.2, 24 and State v. Gomez, 00-0566 (La.1/17/01), , the defendant argues that “victim impact statement” is a term used to describe evidence of the character of a homicide victim and the effect of the death on his or her family, and such evidence is relevant and admissible only at the penalty phase of a capital trial in order to permit the jury to assess meaningfully
  • State v. Warren 2 So. 3d 523 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    87 , 145 L.Ed.2d 74 (1999), recognized as superceded by statute on other grounds in State v. Gomez, 2000-0566 (La.1/17/01), , the supreme court stated: The scope of proper closing argument is confined to “evidence admitted, to the lack of evidence, to conclusions of fact that the state or defendant may draw therefrom and to the law applicable to the case.” However, a prosecutor is afforded considerable latitude in making closing arguments.
  • State v. Gage 965 So. 2d 592 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
    589 , 145 L.Ed.2d 489 (1999), superseded by statute on other grounds, State v. Gomez, 00-566 (La.1/17/01), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Robert S. Willis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
  • State v. Willis 915 So. 2d 365 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    87 , 145 L.Ed.2d 74 (1999), superceded by statute on other grounds as stated in State v. Gomez, 00-0566 (La.1/17/01), .
  • State v. Allen 913 So. 2d 788 La. 2005
    See State v. Gomez, 00-0566 (La.1/17/01), .
  • State v. Faul 873 So. 2d 690 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    art. 9; State v. Gomez, 00-0566 (La.1/17/01), .
  • State of Louisiana v. William Odell Cash La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
  • State v. Cash 861 So. 2d 851 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    State v. Gomez, 00-0566 (La.1/17/01), .
  • State v. Turner 859 So. 2d 911 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    See, State v. Gomez, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/16/01), .