Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Wischer, 885 So. 2d 602.

16 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Derrick Bracken La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. Damond Scott La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
App. 4 Cir. 9/22/04), -09 (the defendant has the burden of proving the affirmative defense of justification, i.e., self-defense, by a preponderance of the evidence).
State ex rel. W.V. 246 So. 3d 34 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
4 Cir. 9/22/04), , 606-07 ( , 910 (La.
State v. Trung Le 243 So. 3d 637 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
4 Cir. 9/22/04), , 606-09 (the defendant has the burden of proving the affirmative defense of justification, i.e., self-defense, by a preponderance of the evidence).
State v. Abbott 222 So. 3d 847 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
App. 4 Cir. 9/22/04), -07 , however/this court acknowledged the dual inquiry discussed in Fluker , but expressly adopted the holding in Cheatwood , that the defendant bore the burden of proving justification by a preponderance of the evidence.
State ex rel. M.J. 160 So. 3d 1040 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 cir. 9/22/04), ; see also State v. Clowney, unpub., 09-1503 (La.App.
State v. Rouser 158 So. 3d 860 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 9/22/04), -09 (the defendant has the burden of proving the affirmative defense of justification, i.e., self-defense, by a preponderance of the evidence).
State v. Canales 156 So. 3d 1183 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 9/22/04), -07 , this court held that in a non-homicide case the defendant carries the burden of proving the affirmative defense that he acted in self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence.
State v. Jones 119 So. 3d 859 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 9/22/04), -607 , a divided panel of this court adopted Cheatwood and held that in a non-homicide case, the defendant has the burden of showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the crime was committed in self-defense.
State v. Cooks 81 So. 3d 932 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 9/22/04), -607 (holding that in a nonhomicide situation the defendant has the burden of showing justification, as an affirmative defense, by a preponderance of the evidence).
State v. Boudreaux 48 So. 3d 1144 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
4 Cir. 9/22/04) , , a simple battery case, the majority recognized its prior decision in Fluker , but adopted the *1162 position that justification/self-defense in a non-homicide case was an affirmative defense that the defendant had the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence.
State v. Black 41 So. 3d 1243 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
4 Cir. 9/22/04), , this Court took a different approach from the Fluker panel.
State v. Stukes 19 So. 3d 1233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
4 Cir. 9/22/04) , , where a divided panel of this court held that in a non-homicide case the defendant has the burden of showing by a preponderance of the *1244 evidence that the crime was committed in self-defense.
State in the Interest of S. R. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Wischer v. New Orleans Police Department 925 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
State v. Jefferson 922 So. 2d 577 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
4 Cir. 9/22/04), , a divided panel of this court held that in non-homicide cases the defendant has the burden of proving the affirmative defense of justification, i.e., self-defense, by a preponderance of the evidence.