Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Holmes, 5 So. 3d 42.

70 citing documents.

State v. Williams 93 So. 3d 830 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
State v. Holmes, 2006 -2988 (La.12/2/08), , cert.
State v. Scott 97 So. 3d 1046 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Holmes, 06 -2988, p. 80 (La.12/2/08), , cert, denied, — U.S. —, 130 S.Ct.
State v. Lewis 96 So. 3d 1211 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Holmes, 06 -2988, p. 80 (La.12/2/08), , cert.
State v. Hardy 92 So. 3d 1090 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
State v. Holmes, 2006 -2988 (La.12/2/08), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Julia Genelle Easily La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Bryant 80 So. 3d 754 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
See State v. Holmes, 2006 -2988 (La.12/02/08), .
State of Louisiana v. James Stubblefield La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Odenbaugh 82 So. 3d 215 La. 2011
See State v. Holmes, 06-2988 (La.12/2/08), ; State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), ; State v. Blank, 04-0204 (La.4/11/07), ; State v. Howard, 98-0064 (La.4/23/99), ; State v. Gradley, 97-0641 (La.5/19/98), ; State v. Robertson, 97-0177 (La.3/4/98), ; St
State v. Rubens 83 So. 3d 30 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. McElveen 73 So. 3d 1033 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
See State v. Holmes, 06-2988 (La.12/2/08), .
State v. Parker 76 So. 3d 55 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Holmes, 2006-2988, p. 55 (La.12/2/08), -80 , Cert.
State v. Dorsey 74 So. 3d 603 La. 2011
06-2988, pp. 2-3 (La.12/2/08); .
State v. Jacobs 67 So. 3d 535 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
See also, State v. Dressner, 08-1366, p. 18 (La.7/6/10), (nothing inherently irreconcilable about arguing each perpetrator’s specific intent in his separate trial); State v. Holmes, 06 -2988, pp. 23-30 (La.12/2/08), -65 , cert.
State v. Moore 69 So. 3d 523 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Holmes, 06-2988 (La.12/2/08), , cert.
State v. Bell 53 So. 3d 437 La. 2010
See, e.g., State v. Holmes, 06 -2988 (La.12/2/08), ; (La.
State v. Dressner 45 So. 3d 127 La. 2010
State v. Scott, 04-1312, pp. 81-83 (La.1/19/06), , 957-58 30 (distinguishing between the state’s adoption of mutually exclusive theories of guilt in successive trials of co-defendants and the state’s emphasis on the facts relating to the culpability of the particular defendant on trial); see also State v. Holmes, 06-2988 (La.12/2/08), (rejecting same due process claim the state presented alternate theory of the crime at capital trial of her codefendant), cert.
State v. Logan 34 So. 3d 528 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Holmes, 06-2988 (La.12/2/08), , cert.
State v. Turner 32 So. 3d 277 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
art. 841; State v. Holmes, 06-2988 (La.12/2/08), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Ricky Joseph La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State v. Horton 28 So. 3d 370 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Holmes, 06-2988, p. 80 (La.12/2/08), .