Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Draughn, 950 So. 2d 583.

278 citing documents.

State v. Breaux 55 So. 3d 806 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
In State v. Draughn, 2005-1825 (La.1/17/07), , the proper reviewing process for a Batson claim, as recently described by the supreme court, was set forth as follows: A defendant’s Batson challenge to a peremptory strike requires a three-step inquiry.
State v. Horn 55 So. 3d 100 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
In State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Johnson 52 So. 3d 110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
art. 841; State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), -21 , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Vincent Marinello La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 70 (La.1/17/07)
State of Louisiana v. Charles D. Washington La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Marinello 49 So. 3d 488 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 70 (La.1/17/07), .
State v. HA, SR. 47 So. 3d 34 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
See also State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07) , cert.
State v. Ramsdell 47 So. 3d 78 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), .
State v. Bess 47 So. 3d 524 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
In State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Jones 46 So. 3d 756 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
14:10(1); State v. Draughn, 2005-1825 (La.01/17/07), , cert.
State v. Kelly 46 So. 3d 229 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
14:10(1); State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Cooper 42 So. 3d 460 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
14:10(1); State v. Draughn, 2005-1825 (La.01/17/07), , cert.
State v. Reed 37 So. 3d 1116 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.01/17/07), , cert.
State v. Coe 40 So. 3d 293 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 8 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Moses Buchanan La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Buchanan 36 So. 3d 1076 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Further, Defendant asserts that the State was required to negate any reasonable probability of misidentification, citing State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Melanie S. Hanner La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Hanner 35 So. 3d 1178 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Haynes 34 So. 3d 325 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
art. 841; State v. Draughn, 05-1825, pp. 55-56 (La.1/17/07), -21 , cert.
State v. Knight 34 So. 3d 307 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Honore 31 So. 3d 485 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Williams 30 So. 3d 131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Linnear 26 So. 3d 303 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
14:10(1); State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Linnear 26 So. 3d 303 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
14:10(1); State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Page 28 So. 3d 442 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
“A post-verdict attack on the sufficiency of an indictment should be rejected unless the indictment failed to give fair notice of the offense charged or failed to set forth any identifiable offense.” *453 State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 60 (La.1/7/07), , cert.
State v. Favors 28 So. 3d 433 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Draughn, 06-1825, p. 60 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Ricky Joseph La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State v. Williams 22 So. 3d 867 La. 2009
On cross-examination, the questioner “has traditionally been allowed to impeach, or discredit, the witness.” State v. Draughn, 05-1825, pp. 47-48 (La.1/17/07), (quoting State v. Robinson, 01-0273, p. 6, (La.5/17/02), ).
State v. Smallwood 20 So. 3d 479 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 44 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Cochran 19 So. 3d 497 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
See, State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. GRH 10 So. 3d 896 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State of Louisiana v. G. R. H. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State of Louisiana v. Connor L. Wood La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
“Specific intent may be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the offense and the conduct of the defendant.” State v. Draughn, 05-1825, pp. 7-8 (La.1/17/07), -93, cert.
State v. Wood 11 So. 3d 701 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
“Specific intent may be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the offense and the conduct of the defendant.” State v. Draughn, 05-1825, pp. 7-8 (La.1/17/07), -93 , cert.
State v. Collins 12 So. 3d 1069 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
In State v. Draughn, 2005-1825 (La.1/17/07), , the proper reviewing process for a Batson claim is set forth as follows: A defendant’s Batson challenge to a peremptory strike requires a three-step inquiry.
State ex rel. B.A.A. 13 So. 3d 1183 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
14:10(1); State v. Draughn, 2005-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State Ex Rel. Baa 13 So. 3d 1183 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
14:10(1); State v. Draughn, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Mosley 13 So. 3d 705 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Additionally, where circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove.” State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Marilyn Roman Lively La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State v. Lively 11 So. 3d 65 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Ayo 7 So. 3d 85 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 70 (La.1/17/07), .
State of Louisiana v. Walter R. Cox, Sr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State v. Langston 3 So. 3d 707 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
14:10(1); State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Longo 8 So. 3d 666 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Draughn, 2005-1825 (La.1/17/07), ; also see, State v. Ingram, 04—551 (La.App.
State v. Mitchell 7 So. 3d 720 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Shivers 998 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
14:10(1); State v. Draughn, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Sudds 998 So. 2d 851 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
See, State v. Draughn, XXXX-XXXX (La.1/17/07), ; State v. Leonard, XXXX-XXXX (La.6/16/06), ; State v. Jones, 41,299 (La.App.2d Cir.11/9/06), .
State v. Holmes 5 So. 3d 42 La. 2008
5/21/08) ; State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), ; State v. Wilson, 03-1229 (La.3/30/05), (death sentence vacated in light of Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 , 125 S.Ct.
State v. Baylor 998 So. 2d 800 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
State v. Draughn, 05-1825, p. 7 (La.1/17/07), , cert.
State v. Anderson 996 So. 2d 973 La. 2008
See State v. Draughn, 05-1825 (La.1/17/07), ; Bridgewater, supra ; Jacobs, supra; State v. Bowie, 00-3344 (La.4/3/02), ; Howard, supra ; Gradley; supra; State v. Tart, 93-0772 (La.2/9/96), ; State v. Taylor, 99-1311 (La.1/17/01), ; Baldwin, supra .