Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Porche, 943 So. 2d 335.

32 citing documents.

State Of Louisiana In The Interest of K.B.J. La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
11129106), ( per curiam); cf. State v. Turner, 2013- 0180 ( La.
State v. Barnes 203 So. 3d 1090 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Lewis 187 So. 3d 24 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
11/29/06), (finding that that the defendant was not under arrest even though officers detained the defendant, placed him in handcuffs, and took him from the scene of a crime to his apartment to allow him to retrieve his identification.); State v. Barabin, 13-0334 (La.App.
State ex rel. J.W. 157 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 1/22/14), (quoting State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 7 (La.11/29/06), ).
Dominique Floyd v. City of Carenco La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
11/29/06), ), the supreme court stated “the use of handcuffs during a putative Terry stop is reasonable if the State can ‘point to some specific fact or circumstance that could have supported a reasonable belief that the use of such restraints was necessary to carry out the legitimate purposes of the stop without exposin
Floyd v. City of Carencro 149 So. 3d 387 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In State v. Turner, 13-0180, p. 3 (La.3/1/13), -55 (quoting State v. Porche, 06-312, p. 8 (La.11/29/06), ), the supreme court stated “the use of handcuffs during a putative Terry stop is reasonable if the State can ‘point to some specific fact or circumstance that could have supported a reasonable belief that the use of such restraints was necessary to carry out the legitimate purposes of the stop without exposing l
State v. Butler 142 So. 3d 306 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
5 Cir. 7/29/08), (citing State v. Porche, 06-312 (La.11/29/06), ).
State v. Beal 142 So. 3d 124 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Porche, 06-0312 (La.11/29/06), ; State v. Thomas, 08-521 (La.App.
State v. Duhe 130 So. 3d 880 La. 2013
State v. Porche, 06-0312, pp. 8-9 (La.11/29/06), (arrest-like features such as the use of drawn weapons and handcuffs may, but do not invariably, render a seizure a de facto arrest).
State v. Barabin 124 So. 3d 1121 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Likewise, in State v. Porche, 2006-0312 (La.11/29/06), , the Court found that the detention of the defendant at the scene of a crime and his forced relocation to his 17nearby apartment did not amount to an arrest.
State v. Turner 108 So. 3d 753 La. 2013
during a putative Terry stop is reasonable if the State can “ ‘point to some specific fact or circumstance that could have supported a reasonable belief that the use of such restraints was necessary to carry out the legitimate purposes of the stop without exposing law enforcement officers, the public, or the suspect himself to an undue risk of harm.’” State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 8 (La.11/29/06), (per cu *755 riam) (emphasis added) (citations omitted).
State v. Gray 101 So. 3d 515 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Porche, 2006-0312 (La.11/29/06), pp. 7-8, , and cases cited therein.
State v. Thompson 93 So. 3d 553 La. 2012
“Even granting the reasonableness of [Agent McKenna’s] decision to detain [Thompson], the officer’s use ■ of handcuffs poses a separate question, as a search or seizure ‘reasonable at its inception may violate the Fourth Amendment by virtue of its intolerable intensity and scope.’” State v. Porche, 2006-0312, p. 7 (La.11/29/06); , citing Terry, 392 U.S. at 18 , 88 S.Ct.
State of Louisiana v. Ricky J. Charpentier La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
11/29/06), -40, the supreme court discussed what circumstances effectuated an arrest: Inherent in the right of the police to conduct a brief investigatory detention is also the right to use reasonable force to effectuate the detention.
State v. Charpentier 86 So. 3d 86 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
In State v. Porche, 06-312, pp. 7-9 (La.11/29/06), -40 , the supreme court discussed what circumstances effectuated an arrest: Inherent in the right of the police to conduct a brief investigatory detention is also the right to use reasonable force to effectuate the detention.
State ex rel. C.S. 106 So. 3d 93 La. 2012
Given his observation of respondent’s furtive movement, and considering that all of the occupants of the vehicle appeared too young to drive, the officer had the requisite particularized objective basis “ ‘to maintain the status quo momentarily while obtaining more information,’ the hallmark of an investigatory stop.” State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 6 (La.11/29/06), ( cf .
State v. Jones 81 So. 3d 236 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
P. art. 703 D; State v. Porche, 2006-0312 (La.l1/29/06), .
State v. Wilford 81 So. 3d 868 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Marshall 70 So. 3d 1106 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
See State v. Adams, 2001-3231 (La.1/14/03), ; State v. Porche, 2006-0312 (La.11/29/06), ; and State v. Palmer, 2009-0044 (La.7/1/09), .
State v. Dickerson 65 So. 3d 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Porche, 06-0312 (La.11/29/06), -340 .
State v. Boudoin 56 So. 3d 233 La. 2011
2587, 2594 , 69 L.Ed.2d 340 (1981)); State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 5 (La.11/29/06), (trial court erred in granting motion to suppress because it failed to accord due deference to the need of the police to “ ‘exercise unquestioned command of the situation’ while they determined the nature and scope of the criminal activity they had uneov-ered.”)(quoting Summers).
State v. Welch 59 So. 3d 441 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
at 1878 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 .” State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 7 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. Mitchell 52 So. 3d 155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Porche, 06-0312 (La.11/29/06), -340 .
State v. Fenn 41 So. 3d 544 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Palmer 14 So. 3d 304 La. 2009
1465 , 161 L.Ed.2d 299 (2005), and this Court’s opinion in State v. Porche, 06-0312 (La.11/29/06), , governed the present case, as the need of the police to exercise unquestioned command in an extremely fluid situation, in which numerous ^persons were pouring out of the residence and scattering at the approach of the officers, justified detention of all persons on the scene temporarily to maintain the status quo as
State v. Thomas 8 So. 3d 646 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State of Louisiana v. Marty Palmer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Moreover, our state supreme court, (La.
State v. Palmer 1 So. 3d 689 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
Moreover, our state supreme court, following a holding of the Unit *696 ed States Supreme Court, reiterated that “[t]here is no question that the use of handcuffs, being one of the most recognizable indicia of traditional arrest, substantially aggravates the intrusiveness of a putative 1 ¡¡Terry stop.
State v. Lazard 2 So. 3d 492 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
In State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 2 (La.11/29/06), , the defendant knocked on the door of an apartment that the police were searching.
State v. Morton 993 So. 2d 651 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
State v. Porche, 06-0312 (La.11/29/06), -340 .
State v. Boyer 967 So. 2d 458 La. 2007
State v. Porche, 06-312, p. 6 (La.11/29/06), -39 ; see Sokolow, 490 U.S. at 7 , 109 S.Ct.
City of Lafayette v. Desormeaux 967 So. 2d 477 La. 2007
2587, 2594 , 69 L.Ed.2d 340 (1981) (“The risk of harm to both the police and [the persons they de *482 tain] is minimized if the officers routinely exercise unquestioned command of the situation.”); accord State v. Porche, 06-0312, p. 5 (La.11/29/06), (Trial court erred in granting a motion to suppress because it failed to accord due deference to the need of the police to exercise unquestioned command of the situation while they determined the nature and scope of the criminal activity they had u