Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Juniors, 915 So. 2d 291.

176 citing documents.

State v. Broussard 224 So. 3d 23 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State of Louisiana v. Earnest G. Hamilton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
Id.; State v. Juniors, 2003-2425, p. 8 (La.6/29/05)
State v. Hamilton 216 So. 3d 367 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State of Louisiana v. Robert Leroy McCoy 218 So. 3d 535 La. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Marcus Donte Reed 200 So. 3d 291 La. 2016
State v. Billups 188 So. 3d 1124 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.06/29/05), , cert.
State v. Dotson 187 So. 3d 79 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Juniors, 2003-2425, p. 7-8 (La.6/29/05), ; State v. Fields, 2013-1493, p. 22 (La.App.
State v. Merwin 186 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967); State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), .
Achary Electrical Contractors, L.L.C. v. SimplexGrinnell LP 185 So. 3d 888 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.06/29/05), .
State v. Holder 181 So. 3d 918 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
art. 607(D)(2); State v. Juniors, 2003-2425 (La.06/29/05), .
State v. Jones 182 So. 3d 251 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Juniors, 03-2425, pp. 7-8 (La.6/29/05), ; State v. Fields, 13-1493, p. 22 (La.App.
State v. Granier 178 So. 3d 1106 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Griffin 176 So. 3d 561 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Juniors, 03-2425, pp. 44-45 (La.6/29/05), -26 (citing State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95), )
State v. Johnson 175 So. 3d 442 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
P. art. 841; State v. Juniors, 2003-2425 (La.06/29/05), .'
State v. Lee 171 So. 3d 1214 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
5 Cir. 11/24/09) , -1140 ; State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Neely 171 So. 3d 1022 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
art. 607(D)(2), which requires the court to determine whether “the probative value of the evidence on the issue of credibility is substantially outweighed by the risks of undue consumption of time, confusion of the issues, or unfair prejudice.” See State v. Juniors, 03-2425, p. 52 (La.6/29/05), ; State v. Cousin, 96-2973, pp. 8-13 (La.4/14/98), -72 .
State v. Burse 169 So. 3d 649 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.06/29/05), .
State of Louisiana v. David J. Koederitz 166 So. 3d 981 La. 2015
6/29/05), (upholding exclusion of medical records offered by the defendant containing the statement that the victim had been shot “by a disgruntled employee” because the statement by an unidentified person “was not reasonably related to diagnosis and treatment” of the victim suffering from a gunshot wound to the head
State v. Ellis 161 So. 3d 64 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
at 4 [ ]; see also, State v. Juniors, 03-2425, p. 28 (La.6/29/05), .
State v. Dadney 167 So. 3d 55 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
5 Cir. 11/24/09) , -40 , writ denied, 10-0086 (La.6/25/10), ; State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Smith 167 So. 3d 736 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Juniors, 2003-2425 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Fields 151 So. 3d 756 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
The Louisiana Supreme Court set forth the applicable law in State v. Juniors, 03-2425, pp. 7-9 (La.6/29/05), -305 , as follows: Louisiana Constitution article I, § 17 guarantees to a defendant the right to full voir dire examination of prospective jurors and to challenge jurors peremptorily.
State v. Porter 151 So. 3d 871 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
ial *885 verdict according to the law and the evidence; (3) The relationship, whether by blood, marriage, employment, friendship, or enmity between the juror and the defendant, the person injured by the offense, the district attorney, or defense counsel, is such that it is reasonable to conclude that it would influence the juror in arriving at a verdict; In State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), , the defendant argued that the trial court erroneously denied a challenge for cause where the juror
State v. Magee 150 So. 3d 446 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
“[A] challenge for cause should be granted, even when a prospective juror declares his ability to remain impartial, if the juror’s responses as a whole reveal facts from which bias, prejudice, or inability to render judgment according to law may be reasonably implied.” State v. Jun *453 iors, 03-2425, p. 9 (La.6/29/05), , cert, denied, 547 U.S. 1115 , 126 S.Ct.
State v. Baham 149 So. 3d 1235 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Juniors, 03-2425, p. 60-61 (La.6/29/05), -35 .
State v. Dominguez 148 So. 3d 648 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
.In State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Parker 141 So. 3d 839 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
1 5See also State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.06/29/05), , cert.
Frost v. Carter 140 So. 3d 59 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Cf. State v. Juniors, 03-2425, p. 43, (La.6/29/05), ; Judd.
State v. Gay 136 So. 3d 919 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
1283 , 18 L.Ed.2d 241 (1967); State v. Juniors, 2003-2425 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Fielding 130 So. 3d 1052 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
State v. Juniors, 2003-2425 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Tassin 129 So. 3d 1235 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2013
The Louisiana Supreme Court, recognizing this statute as an exception to the hearsay rule, has held that “it must be strictly construed, and all formalities prescribed in the law must be followed.” *1268 State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Allen 129 So. 3d 724 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
See State v. Juniors, 2003-2425, p. 55 (La.6/29/05), (“[Bjecause any error in the exclusion of the letter allegedly written by Williams was clearly harmless, the defendant was not deprived of the opportunity to present a defense.”).
State v. Bender 120 So. 3d 867 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Juniors, 03-2425, p. 28 (La.6/29/05), .
Jonathon Guillory v. Progressive Ins. Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Guillory v. Progressive Ins. 117 So. 3d 318 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), .
State v. Morgan 119 So. 3d 817 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
art. 607(D)(2), which requires the court to determine whether its probative value is “substantially outweighed by the risks of undue consumption of time, confusion of the issues, or unfair prejudice.” State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Florant 119 So. 3d 635 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
(quoting State v. Juniors, 03-2425, p. 32 (La.6/29/05), , cert.
State v. Adams 119 So. 3d 46 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
art. 607(D)(2); State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), ; State v. Cousin, 96-2973 (La.4/14/98), -72 .
State v. Lewis 112 So. 3d 796 La. 2013
Id.; State v. Juniors, 2003-2425, p. 8 (La.6/29/05), .
State of Louisiana v. Louis Joseph George La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Magee 103 So. 3d 285 La. 2012
State v. Campbell, 06-0286, p. 70 (La.5/21/08), ; State v. Juniors, 03-2425, pp. 7-8 (La.6/29/05), ; State v. Cross, 93-1189, p. 6 (La.6/30/95), .
State v. Kirk 98 So. 3d 934 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Juniors, 03-2425, pp. 7-8 (La.6/29/05), -305 .
State of Louisiana v. Terrance L. Sinegal La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Sinegal 97 So. 3d 649 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
In State v. Juniors, 03-2425, pp. 7-8 (La.6/29/05), -05 , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Robert Daniel Wilkins La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
at 4, see also, State v. Juniors, 03-2425, p. 28 (La.6/29/05)
State v. Wilkins 94 So. 3d 983 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
at 4, ; see also, State v. Juniors, 03-2425, p. 28 (La.6/29/05), .
State v. Everett 96 So. 3d 605 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Juniors, 03-2425, pp. 44-45 (La.6/29/05), -26 , citing State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95)
State of Louisiana v. K.W. T. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Esteve 92 So. 3d 1058 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Juniors, 03-2425 (La.6/29/05), -27 , cert.
State v. Massey 91 So. 3d 453 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
“The trial court plays a unique role in the dynamics of a voir dire, for it is the court that observes firsthand the demeanor of the attorneys and venire persons, the nuances of questions asked, the racial composition of the venire, and the general atmosphere of the voir dire that simply cannot be replicated from a cold transcript.” State v. Juniors, 03-2425, p. 32 (La.6/29/05), , cert.