Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Williams, 830 So. 2d 984.

72 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. James Russel Johnson, Jr. La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. Stephen Douglas Cormier La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
We have previously examined the legislative history behind the Article in State v. Williams, 02–1030 (La.10/15/02)
Douglas Bienvenu v. 1 and 2 87184 C/W John Doe v. 1 and 2 87515 La. 2024
10/15/02), (the general rule established by this Court is that issues not submitted [or waived] before the trial court for decision will not be considered by the appellate court on appeal).
State of Louisiana v. Juan Dedilos Villarreal Gamboa La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
10/15/02), the supreme court stated: “The general rule established by this Court is that issues not submitted to the trial court for decision will not be considered by the appellate court on appeal.” Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 559(A) provides that “[u]pon motion of the defendant and after a contradictory
State of Louisiana v. Marlin Devary Demouchet La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
3 Cir. 3/5/03), -1200, this court reviewed “out of an abundance of caution[,]” a defendant’s argument on appeal that his constitutional right to a speedy trial, even though the argument was not raised in the trial court, stating: We note State v. Williams, 02-1030, 02-898 (La.10/15/02), in which the court stated that generally issues not argued at trial will not be reviewed on appeal.
State Of Louisiana v. Jessie James Baker La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
10/ 15/ 02), the Supreme Court further spoke to the issue as follows: " The general rule established by this Court is that issues not submitted to the trial court for decision will not be considered by the appellate court on appeal.
State Of Louisiana v. Jerry Lavelle Vince La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
State of Louisiana v. Lance S. Barton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2021
This Court responded: “The purpose of the newly enacted Article 412.2 was discussed by the Louisiana Supreme Court at length in State v. Williams, 02– 18 1030 (La.10/15/02)
State Of Louisiana v. Donald E. Tate La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
State of Louisiana Versus Delcome David Evans La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2020
10/15/02), the Louisiana Supreme Court held that La.
State of Louisiana v. Will Antonio Celestine La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
10/15/02), the supreme court further spoke to the issue as follows: “The general rule established by this Court is that issues not submitted to the trial court for decision will not be considered by the appellate court on appeal.
State of Louisiana v. Robert E. Smith Jr. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
10/15/02), (wherein the Supreme Court held that La.
State v. Howard 258 So. 3d 66 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Robertson 243 So. 3d 1196 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
State of Louisiana v. Christopher Lance Washburn La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
5 Williams, 02-1030 (La.10/15/02)
State v. Washburn 206 So. 3d 1143 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Falgout 198 So. 3d 1232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Williams, 2002-0989, 2002-1030 (La.10/15/02), ; 4 - see also State v. Woodberry, 2014-0476, p. 14 (La.
State v. Wells 191 So. 3d 1127 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
See State v. Williams, 02-1030, p. 7 (La.10/15/02), ; State v. Kelly, 08-0200, pp. 5-6 (La.App.
State v. Rumley 183 So. 3d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Williams, 2002-0898, p. 6 (La.10/15/02), ; State v. Farrier, 2014- *666 0623, p. 20 (La.App.
State v. Farrier 162 So. 3d 1233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
See also State v. Williams, 02-1030, pp. 4-6 (La.10/15/02), 7 .
State of Louisiana v. Nathaniel Wayne Carmouche La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
This court has discussed the article at some length: The purpose of the newly enacted Article 412.2 was discussed by the Louisiana Supreme Court at length in State v. Williams, 02- 1030 (La.10/15/02)
State v. Carmouche 145 So. 3d 1101 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
This court has discussed the article at some length: The purpose of the newly enacted Article 412.2 was discussed by the Louisiana Supreme Court at length in State v. Williams, 02-1030 (La.10/15/02), .
State v. Hollins 123 So. 3d 840 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
We have previously examined the legislative history behind the Article in State v. Williams, 2002-1030 (La.10/15/02), .
State v. Harris 83 So. 3d 269 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
In State v. Williams, 02-1030, p. 6 (La.10/15/02), , the Louisiana Supreme Court held that La.C.E.
State v. Wright 79 So. 3d 309 La. 2011
We have previously examined the legislative history behind the Article in State v. Williams, 02-1030 (La.10/15/02), .
State of Louisiana v. Russell Gene Ware, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Ware 80 So. 3d 593 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Mayeaux [Mayeux ], ([La.App.]
State v. Friday 73 So. 3d 913 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
See also State v. Williams, 2002-1030, pp. 4-5 (La.10/15/02), -987 ; Buckenberger, 984 So.2d at 756-57 .
State v. Scoggins 70 So. 3d 145 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
B. In a case in which the state intends to offer evidence under the provisions of this Article, the prosecution shall, upon request of the accused, provide reasonable notice in advance of trial of the nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial for such purposes In State v. Williams, 2002-1030 (La.10/15/02), , the Supreme Court decided that La.
State v. Austin 99 So. 3d 1008 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
See State v. Williams, 2002-1030, 2002-0898 (La.10/15/02), .
State v. Fisher 40 So. 3d 1020 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
See State v. Williams, 2002-1030 (La.10/15/02), .
State of Louisiana v. Chrishon M. Archield La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
This court has observed “Although the wording of the federal rule differs from the Louisiana rule, as observed by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Williams, [] a review of federal jurisprudence reveals the two rules are virtually identical in application.” State v. 17 Willis, 05-218, p.27 (La.App.
State v. ARCHIELD 34 So. 3d 434 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
This court has observed “Although the wording of the federal rule differs from the Louisiana rule, as observed by the Louisiana Supreme Court in Williams, [ ,] a review of federal jurisprudence reveals the two rules are virtually identical in application.” State v. Willis, 05-218, p. 27 (La.App.
State v. Williams 28 So. 3d 357 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
See also State v. Williams, 02-1030 (La.10/15/02), .
State v. Smith 20 So. 3d 501 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
|9Both cases relied on the Louisiana Supreme Court case of State v. Williams, 02-1030, p. 7 (La.10/15/02), .
State v. Tassin 998 So. 2d 278 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
State v. Williams, 02-1030, p. 7 (La.10/15/02), .
State of Louisiana v. Melvin Tassin La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
“Constitutional issues are no exception.” State v. Williams, 02-1030, p. 7 (La.10/15/02)
State v. Caston 996 So. 2d 480 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
In State v. Williams, 02-1030 (La.10/15/02), , the court explained that the state legislature enacted La.
State v. Kelly 986 So. 2d 880 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
5 Cir. 11/30/04) , , citing State v. Williams, 02-1030 (La.10/15/02), .
State v. Buckenberger 984 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
State v. Williams, XXXX-XXXX (La.10/15/02), -987 .
State v. Hotard 975 So. 2d 16 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
State v. Williams, 02-1030, 02-0898, p. 6 (La.10/15/02), .
State v. Zachary 973 So. 2d 176 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Annie Mae Nunez v. Michael I. Tribe La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. Michael W. Colton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Nunez v. Tribe 966 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Colton 968 So. 2d 1239 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Williams, 02-1030, p. 7 (La.10/15/02), .
State of Louisiana v. W.D.F., Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. Joseph Jody" Duplichan, Jr. " La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. Duplichan 945 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
Eric R. Cerwonka v. Joe D. Baker and Teresa Cothran Baker La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006