Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Kennedy, 803 So. 2d 916.

73 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Stephen Douglas Cormier La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
In Williams, this Court noted the enactment of the Article was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97–2918 (La.10/20/98), and State v. Kennedy, 00–1554 (La.4/3/01)
State Of Louisiana v. Brian Clarke La. 2022
4/3/01), (“In general intent crimes, like aggravated rape, the criminal intent necessary to sustain a conviction is established by the very doing of the proscribed acts.
State v. Gasser 275 So. 3d 976 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
State of Louisiana Versus Ronald Gasser La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2019
art. 404(B)(1); Lee, 05–2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139; State v. Kennedy, 00–1554, p. 5 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Henry 256 So. 3d 1080 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
4/3/01), , 923 ; , 727 (La.1980) ) "It is not necessary that a person be present in the dwelling at the time of the unauthorized entry to satisfy the inhabitation requirement; however, it must be proven that someone was actually 'living' in the dwelling at the time."
State of Louisiana v. Kade Starbuck Henry La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
4/3/01), ) “It is not necessary that a person be present in the dwelling at the time of the unauthorized entry to satisfy the inhabitation requirement; however, it must be proven that someone was actually ‘living’ in the dwelling at the time.” State v. Morrison, 07-
State of Louisiana v. John Drummer, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
art. 404(B)(1); Lee, 05-2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139; State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 5 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Drummer 245 So. 3d 93 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State of Louisiana v. Aaron Orlando Richards -Aka- Aaron Richards La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
art. 404(B)(1); Lee, 05-2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139; State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 5 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Richards 247 So. 3d 878 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Colby 244 So. 3d 1260 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State of Louisiana v. Derrick Walker Stafford -Aka- Derrick Stafford La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
See also, State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 6 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Stafford 241 So. 3d 1060 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Breedlove 213 So. 3d 1195 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
State v. Washburn 206 So. 3d 1143 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Christopher Lance Washburn La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
In Williams, this Court noted the enactment of the Article was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), and State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Falgout 198 So. 3d 1232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Art, 412.2 was enacted in 2001 in response to the Court’s ruling in State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.4/3/01), , which held that evidence of other crimes was not admissible under La.
State v. Fair 182 So. 3d 1238 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01), .
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 of Louisiana v. Gary LAYTON; State of Louisiana v. Gary Layton 168 So. 3d 358 La. 2015
State of Louisiana v. Nathaniel Wayne Carmouche La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
The Williams court found as follows: The transcript of the committee hearing reveals that Act 1130 was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), and State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Carmouche 145 So. 3d 1101 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
The Williams court found as follows: The transcript of the committee hearing reveals that Act 1130 was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.4/3/01), .
State of Louisiana v. Ted Dwayne Stevens, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
art. 404(B)(1); Lee, 05-2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139; State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 5 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Stevens 140 So. 3d 1267 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
art. 404(B)(1); Lee , 05-2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139 ; State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 5 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Altenberger 139 So. 3d 510 La. 2014
art. 404(B)(1); Lee , 05-2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139 ; State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 5 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Hollins 123 So. 3d 840 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
In Williams, this Court noted the enactment of the Article was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Garcia 108 So. 3d 1 La. 2012
art. 404(B)(1); Lee , 05-2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139 ; State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 5 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Wright 79 So. 3d 309 La. 2011
In Williams , this Court 11snoted the enactment of the Article was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Fisher 40 So. 3d 1020 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
art. 404(B)(1) in State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.04/03/01), and State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and to allow admission of evidence of other similar cranes even for general intent crimes such as aggravated rape.
State v. Davis 26 So. 3d 802 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
art. 412.2 was enacted following State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Williams 28 So. 3d 357 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
In State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01), , the Louisiana Supreme Court held that absent a dispute as to whether the accused intended to commit the crime, evidence of other crimes was prohibited to show intent when the crime charged was a general intent crime.
State v. GRH 10 So. 3d 896 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
4/3/01), , superseded by statute as stated in State v. Zornes, 34,070 (La.App.
State of Louisiana v. G. R. H. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
4/3/01), superseded by statute as stated in State v. Zornes, 34,070 (La.App.
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. Colbert 990 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
The Supreme Court urged caution in the use of art. 404(B) in State v. Kennedy, XXXX-XXXX, p. 5 (La.4/3/01), , 920: Simply put, the rule articulated in Article 404(B)(1) prohibits the State from introducing evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts to show a probability that the accused committed the charged crime because he is a "bad" person who has a propensity for this type of offense.
State v. Mathieu 980 So. 2d 716 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
The Supreme Court urged caution in the use of art. 404(B) in State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 5 (La.4/3/01), , 920: Simply put, the rule articulated in Article 404(B)(1) prohibits the State from introducing evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts to show a probability that the accused committed the charged crime because he is a "bad" person who has a propensity for this type of offense.
State v. Griffin 984 So. 2d 97 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
Crochet, XXXX-XXXX at pp. 7-8, 931 So.2d at 1087 ( citing State v. Kennedy, XXXX-XXXX, pp. 6-7 (La.4/3/01), , 921 ); see also La C.E.
State v. Fussell 974 So. 2d 1223 La. 2008
State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 4 n. 3 (La.4/3/01), , 928 n. 3 (citing La.
State v. Ware 959 So. 2d 459 La. 2007
Although intoxication is not a defense to the charged offense of aggravated rape, a general intent crime, State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 10 (La.4/3/01), , it is a defense to the crime for which jurors convicted him, attempted forcible rape, which requires proof of specific intent.
State v. Wallace 949 So. 2d 556 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
See State v. Morgan, 99-1895 (La.6/29/01), ; State v. Kennedy, XXXX-XXXX (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Williams 950 So. 2d 126 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
Louisiana Code of Evidence article 412.2 was enacted following State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.04/03/01), , [3] and allows admission of evidence of other similar crimes even for general intent crimes such as aggravated rape when the victim in the case at issue is a child *132 under the age of seventeen.
State v. Francois 945 So. 2d 865 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Further, the supreme court in State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, p. 10 (La.4/3/01), , stated, "General criminal intent exists `when the circumstances indicate that the offender, in the ordinary course of human experience, must have adverted to the prescribed criminal consequences as reasonably certain to result from his act or failure to act.'
State of Louisiana v. Craig Francois La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
4/3/01), stated, “General criminal intent exists ‘when the circumstances indicate that the offender, in the ordinary course of human experience, must have adverted to the prescribed criminal consequences as reasonably certain to result from his act or failure to act.’ La.Rev.Stat.
State v. Crochet 931 So. 2d 1083 La. 2006
See State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, pp. 6-7 (La.4/3/01), ( that "evidence of prior sex crimes against the prosecuting victim is admissible under an exception to the general rule excluding evidence of other crimes similar to the charged offense").
State v. Shank 924 So. 2d 316 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
5 Cir.1/27/98), -1104 , writ denied, 98-0643 (La.8/28/98), , [14] State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Rose 925 So. 2d 34 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
In State v. Galliano, 02-2849 (La.1/10/03), , the Supreme Court again stated that it did not need to reach the issue of the burden of proof: As to the requisite burden of proof, we noted in State v. Kennedy, XXXX-XXXX (La.4/3/01), , 920 n. 5 that Article 1104 of the Louisiana Code of Evidence was added in 1994 to provide that "the burden of proof in a shall be identical to the burden of proof required by Federal Rules of Evidence Article IV, Rule 404."
State of Louisiana v. Robert S. Willis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
4/3/01), superceded by statute as stated in State v. Zornes, 34,070 (La.App.
State v. Willis 915 So. 2d 365 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
The Defendant further asserts that evidence of other crimes and bad acts was not admissible under both Articles 404(B) and 412.2 pursuant to State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01), , superceded by statute as stated in State v. Zornes, 34,070 (La.App.
State of Louisiana v. James Allen Drake, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
State v. Drake 903 So. 2d 1166 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
State v. Kennedy, 00-1554, pp. 5-6 (La.4/3/01), -21 .