Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Mercadel, 874 So. 2d 829.

24 citing documents.

In Re: Clemmie Leon Porter Applying for the Adoption of L.R.C. La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
5/25/04), Ring v. State, DOTD, 02-1367 (La.
State Of Louisiana v. William Wayne Lee, Jr. La. 2023
5/25/04), (quoting Ring v. State, Dept. of Transp.
Samuel Barker v. Judge Karen Herman, Chief Judge Laurie White, Judge Flemings-Davillier, Judge Benedict Willard, Judge Landrum-Johnson, Judge … La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
Danny Battaglia, Quentin Coleman, James Gilmore, Anderson Hill, Scott Lingle, and Terrance Simon v. James M. LeBlanc, Secretary, … La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
5/ 25/ 04), ( noting that a court should avoid constitutional questions when disposition of a case can be achieved on non -constitutional grounds).
Barber v. La. Workforce Comm'n 266 So. 3d 368 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Lee Rand v. City of New Orleans 235 So. 3d 1077 La. 2017
5/25/04); (quoting Latour v. State, 00-1176, p. 5 (La.
Derrick Shepherd v. Thomas Schedler, in His Official Capacity as the Secretary of State for the State of … La. 2016
State v. Draughter 130 So. 3d 855 La. 2013
In State v. Mercadel, 2003-3015 (La.5/25/04); , the court set forth the general principles of constitutional law regarding legal standing to challenge the constitutionality of code articles and statutes: 113Although this court generally possesses the power and authority to decide the constitutionality of the provisions challenged in defendant’s motion to quash hi
Dionysia Prejean v. Robert T. Barousse, Acadia Parish Clerk of Court La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
5/25/04), (wherein the supreme court explained that “a court should avoid constitutional questions whenever the case can be disposed of on non- constitutional grounds”) and State v. Hatton, 07-2377, p. 18 (La.
Prejean v. Barousse 90 So. 3d 477 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Mercadel, 03-3015, p. 8 (La.5/25/04), (wherein the supreme court explained that “a court should avoid constitutional questions whenever the case can be disposed of on non-constitutional grounds”) and State v. Hatton, 07-2377, p. 18 (La.7/1/08), (wherein the supreme court noted that “[a] judge’s sua sponte declaration of unconstitut
State v. Bertrand 6 So. 3d 738 La. 2009
State v. Matron, 07-2377, p. 13 (La.7/1/08), ; State v. Mercadel, 03-3015, p. 7 (La.5/25/04), ; Ring v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, 02-1367, pp. 6-7 (La.1/14/03), .
Mitch David Bourque v. Tomas Drake La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Bourque v. Drake 995 So. 2d 1215 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
State v. Mercadel, 03-3015, pp. 7-8 (La.5/25/04), .
State v. Hatton 985 So. 2d 709 La. 2008
State v. Mercadel, 03-3015, p. 7 (La.5/25/04), (citing Ring v. State, DOTD, 02-1367, pp. 6-7 (La.1/14/03), ).
State v. Rideau 947 So. 2d 127 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
879 So.2d at 879-80 , citing State v. Mercadel, 03-3015 (La.5/25/04), .
State v. Turner 936 So. 2d 89 La. 2006
State v. Mercadel, 03-3015, p. 8 (La.5/25/04), ; Ring v. State DOTD, 02-1367, p. 7 (La.1/14/03), .
In Re Melancon 935 So. 2d 661 La. 2006
State v. Mercadel, 03-3015, pp. 7-8 (La.5/25/04), , citing Ring v. State, Department of Transportation and Development, 02-1367 (La.1/14/03), .
State v. Washington 900 So. 2d 1072 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
See also State v. Mercadel, XXXX-XXXX (La.5/25/04), (where the Supreme Court stated that a defendant, whose motion to quash alleged that the selection procedures in place after the 2001 amendments to the statutes were still unconstitutional local laws, had no standing because he had failed to show that the statutes had a serious effect on his rights); State v. Newman
State v. Washington 900 So. 2d 1072 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
See also State v. Mercadel, 2003-3015 (La.5/25/04), (where the Supreme Court stated that a defendant, whose motion to quash alleged that the selection procedures in place after the 2001 amendments to the statutes were still unconstitutional local laws, had no standing because he had failed to show that the statutes had a serious effect on his rights); State v. Newman
State v. Citizen 898 So. 2d 325 La. 2005
Further, although the courts generally possess the power and authority to decide the constitutionality of challenged statutory provisions, a court "is required to decide a constitutional issue only `if the procedural posture of the case and the relief sought by the appellant demand that [it] do so.'" State v. Mercadel, 03-3015 (La.5/25/04), (quoting Ring v. State, Dept. of Transp.
Greater New Orleans Expressway Commission v. Olivier 892 So. 2d 570 La. 2005
_J^This is so because this court may only consider a constitutional issue where “ ‘the procedural posture of the case and the relief sought by the appellant demand that [it] do so.’ ” State v. Mercadel, 2003-3015 (La.5/25/04), (quoting Ring v. State, DOTD, 2002-1367 (La.1/14/03), ).
GREATER NEW ORLEANS EXP. COM'N v. Olivier 892 So. 2d 570 La. 2005
This is so because this court may only consider a constitutional issue where "`the procedural posture of the case and the relief sought by the appellant demand that [it] do so.'" State v. Mercadel, XXXX-XXXX (La.5/25/04), (quoting Ring v. State, DOTD, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/14/03), ).
State v. Newman 879 So. 2d 870 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
In State v. Mercadel, 2003-3015 (La.5/25/04), , the Louisiana Supreme Court found that a defendant had no standing to challenge certain criminal statutes on the ground that they were prohibited local or special laws under La.
State v. Bradley 876 So. 2d 745 La. 2004
The judgment of the court is vacated and this case is remanded for reconsideration of the motion to quash in light of State v. Mercadel, 03-3015 (La.5/25/04), .