Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Higgins, 898 So. 2d 1219.

210 citing documents.

State v. Draughn 950 So. 2d 583 La. 2007
[5] See State v. Higgins, XXXX-XXXX (La.4/1/05), , cert.
STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS AMANDA GUTWEILER AKA AMANDA HYPES La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. Gutweiler 940 So. 2d 160 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. Higgins, 03-1980 (La.4/1/05), , cert.
State v. Leger 936 So. 2d 108 La. 2006
Motion to Suppress Identification In State v. Higgins, XXXX-XXXX (La.4/1/05), , cert.
State v. Weary 931 So. 2d 297 La. 2006
However, "[t]he trier of fact makes credibility determinations and may, within the bounds of rationality, accept or reject the *312 testimony of any witness; thus, a reviewing court may impinge on the fact finder's discretion `only to the extent necessary to guarantee the fundamental protection of due process of law.'" State v. Higgins, XXXX-XXXX p. 17 (La.4/1/05), , cert.
State v. Hano 938 So. 2d 181 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
State v. Higgins, XXXX-XXXX, p. 6 (La.4/1/05), , cert.
State v. Thomas 938 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
State v. Higgins, XXXX-XXXX, p. 6 (La.4/1/05), , cert.
State v. Scott 921 So. 2d 904 La. 2006
State v. Higgins, 03-1980, pp. 30-31 (La.4/1/05), -39 ; State v. Lucky, 96-1687, p. 6 (La.4/13/99), .
State v. Mims 907 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
Citing State v. Higgins, XXXX-XXXX (La.4/1/05), , Mims contends that in the time that elapsed between the event and her initial statement to police, her trial testimony, the influence of intervening knowledge, and her intoxicated state at the time of the observations all combine to reduce the reasonableness of her conclusions and perceptions.
State ex rel. E.D.C. 903 So. 2d 571 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
State v. Higgins, 03-1980 (La.4/1/05), .