Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Jefferson, 922 So. 2d 577.

40 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Cardell A. Hayes La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
App. 4 Cir. 12/21/05), –88).
State of Louisiana v. Kenneth Collins La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
App. 4 Cir. 12/21/05), -88).
State of Louisiana v. Derrick Bracken La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
State Of Louisiana v. Joshua Tarez Willis La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
App. 4th Cir. 12/ 21/ 05), - 04, writ denied, 2006- 0940 ( La.
State of Louisiana v. Brandon R. Laurant La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
App. 4 Cir. 12/21/05), ).
State v. Bibbins 258 So. 3d 134 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 12/21/05), , 587-588.
State v. Wooten 244 So. 3d 1216 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 12/21/05), , writ denied , 2006-0940 (La.
State v. Abbott 222 So. 3d 847 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
App. 4 Cir. 12/21/05), , this court ac *858 knowledged the split in the Fluker and Wischer decisions but declined to resolve the conflict, finding that under the more stringent standard, the evidence viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in s
State v. De Gruy 215 So. 3d 723 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
4 Cir. 12/21/05), -88 , citing State v. Osborne, 00-0345, p. 7 (La.App.
State v. Cavalier 171 So. 3d 1117 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 12/21/05) , , citing State v. Duplessis, 2000-2122, p. 13 (La.App.
State v. Bernard 171 So. 3d 1063 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 12/21/05), , this Court *1081 rejected the appellant’s argument that it l27should vacate the mandatory minimum sentence imposed because the trial court failed to give its reasons for sentencing or cite any factors enumerated in La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Griffin 169 So. 3d 473 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 12/21/05) ; -97 , writ denied, 06-940 (La.10/27/06); , the defendant objected to a detective’s identification of an eyewitness’ voice on a 9-1-1 recording.
State v. Nelson 169 So. 3d 493 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 12/21/05) ; -97 , writ denied, 06-940 (La.10/27/06); , the defendant objected to a detective’s identification of an eyewitness’ voice on a 9-1-1 recording.
State v. McClure 169 So. 3d 510 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 12/21/05) ; -97 , writ denied, 06-940 (La.10/27/06); , the defendant objected to a detective’s identification of an eyewitness’ voice on a 9-1-1 recording.
State v. Berniard 163 So. 3d 71 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 12/21/05) , , this Court found that the trial court did not err in permitting a detective to identify the voice on a 911 recording as that of a witness to the shooting of a police officer, for which defendant was charged and convicted of attempted first degree murder.
State ex rel. M.J. 160 So. 3d 1040 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 12/21/05) , ; State v. Wischer, 04-0325 (La.App.
State v. Perkins 155 So. 3d 649 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 12/21/05) , ; and State v. Brown, 2003-2155 (La.App.
State ex rel. A.W. 137 So. 3d 728 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Lindsey 129 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 12/21/05) , ; State v. Brown, 03-2155 (La.App.
State v. Williams 129 So. 3d 692 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Marcelin 116 So. 3d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 12/21/05), , this Court explained, while “Louisiana law favors concurrent sentences for crimes committed as part of a single transaction, a trial judge retains the discretion to impose consecutive sentences on the basis of other factors.” Nevertheless, the trial court must articulate specific justification “beyond a mere ar
State v. Gatewood 103 So. 3d 627 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 12/21/05) ; , writ denied, 06-940 (La.10/27/06); .
State v. Joyner 107 So. 3d 675 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 12/21/05), (attempted first degree murder of a police officer).
State v. Williams 85 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 12/21/05), , 604: Although Louisiana law favors concurrent sentences for crimes committed as part of a single transaction, a trial judge *777 retains the discretion to impose consecutive sentences on the basis of other factors, including the offender’s past criminality and violence in the charged crimes.
State v. Buckley 88 So. 3d 482 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 12/21/05) , , for example, this Court rejected the appellant’s argument that it should vacate the mandatory minimum sentence imposed because the trial court failed to mention any reasons for sentencing, including any sentencing factors enumerated in La.
State v. Maxwell 83 So. 3d 113 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 12/21/05), ; State v. Brown, 2003-2155, p. 5 (La.App.
State v. Cooks 81 So. 3d 932 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Lomax 81 So. 3d 788 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 12/21/05) , , this Court rejected the defendant’s argument that it should vacate the mandatory minimum sentence imposed because the trial court failed to mention any reasons for sentencing, including any sentencing factors enumerated in La.C.Cr.P.
State of Louisiana v. Jonathan Edward Boyer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 12/21/05), writ denied, 06-940 (La.
State v. Vincent 56 So. 3d 408 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 12/21/05) , , citing State v. Green, 99-2847, p. 8 (La.App.
State v. Boudreaux 48 So. 3d 1144 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Jenkins 45 So. 3d 173 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Black 41 So. 3d 1243 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
4 Cir 12/21/05), , and State v. Stukes, XXXX-XXXX (La.App.
State v. Horton 28 So. 3d 370 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
4 Cir. 12/21/05) , -600 , writ denied, 06-940 (La.
State v. Stukes 19 So. 3d 1233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. VanBuren 3 So. 3d 552 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
App. 4 Cir. 12/21/05), .
State v. Major 1 So. 3d 715 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
State of Louisiana v. Damon Lee Harmon La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
4 Cir. 12/21/05), writ denied, 06-940 (La.
State v. Douglas 952 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
4 Cir. 12/21/05), [2] , for example, this Court rejected the appellant's argument that it should vacate the mandatory minimum sentence imposed because the trial court failed to mention any reasons for sentencing, including any sentencing factors enumerated in La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Bell 947 So. 2d 774 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
4 Cir. 12/21/05), ; State v. Brown, 2003-2155 (La.App.