Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Boyer, 967 So. 2d 458.

36 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. K.B. La. 2025
10/16/07), (“mere propinquity to others independently suspected of criminal activity does not, without more, give rise to probable cause to search that person.” (citing Ybarra v. Illinois, 444 U.S. 85, 91, 100 S.Ct.
State of Louisiana v. Kevin Dupart La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
10/16/07), (citing Dumas, 00-862, pp. 2-3, 786 So.2d at 81-82 and Terry, 392 U.S. at 27, 88 S.Ct.
State v. Jackson 257 So. 3d 179 La. 2018
10/16/07), , 469 ; State v. Temple , 02-1895 (La.
State v. Miguel 211 So. 3d 426 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
1 0/16/07), -470 ; [State v.] Isidore, 00-2781 at p. 4 [ (La.
State v. Bradstreet 170 So. 3d 306 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Boyer, 07-0476, pp. 17-18 (La.10/16/07), -70 (quotations |flomitted; citations to quoted material omitted).
State ex rel. J.W. 157 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
It is well established that “in determining whether the officer acted reasonably in such circumstances, due weight must be given, not to his inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or ‘hunch,’ but to the specific reasonable inferences which he is entitled to draw from the facts in light of his experience.” State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 20 (La.10/16/07), (quoting Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 27 , 88 S.Ct.
State v. Harris 140 So. 3d 1226 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
Terry, supra; State v. Boyer, 2007-0476, (La.10/16/07), .
State v. McClendon 133 So. 3d 239 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
1868 ; State, v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 17 (La.10/16/07), -170 .
State v. Candebat 133 So. 3d 304 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 10/26/11), , writ denied, 2011-2568 (La.12/14/11), , quoting State v. Boyer, 2007-0476, p. 22 (La.10/16/07), , this Court set out the requirements of the “plain feel” exception: In Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366, 371 , 113 S.Ct.
State v. Gayden 133 So. 3d 173 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Both the United States and Louisiana Constitutions protect against unreasonable searches and seizures, although “a police office may briefly detain an individual for investigative purposes if the officer has a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the individual has committed or is about to commit a crime.” State v. Boyer, 2007-0476, p. 17 (La.10/16/2007), (citations omitted).
State v. Vessel 131 So. 3d 523 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
2130, 2137 , 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993); State v. Boyer, 07-476, p. 22 (La.10/16/07), .
State v. Carter 131 So. 3d 479 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
1868 ; State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 17 (La.10/16/07), -470 ; Isidore , 00-2781 at p. 4, 789 So.2d at 83 .
State v. Chaplain 114 So. 3d 1274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
See also, State v. Rabon, 2000-935, p. 1 (La.6/30/00), (noting that an otherwise inexplicable failure to remove a hand from a pocket may give rise to reasonable suspicion for a weapons search); State v. Boyer, 2007-0476, p. 21 (La.10/16/07), ("Officer Guillotf] was trained for the purpose of officer safety, to order persons in these situations to remove their hands from their pockets....
State v. Magee 110 So. 3d 680 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
arches conducted by the police “is not whether the police officer subjectively believes he is in danger, or whether he articulates that subjective belief in his testimony at a suppression hearing,” but whether “a reasonably prudent person in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of other [persons] was in danger.” State v. Boyer, 2007-0476, p. 20 (La.10/16/07), (citations omitted); cf. Sylvester, 2001-0607 at 6, 826 So.2d at 1109 (“[T]he officer’s concern for
State v. Butler 101 So. 3d 121 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Accordingly, the issue is not whether the police officer subjectively believed (or articulated a subjective belief at the motion hearing or trial) that he was in danger, but whether “a reasonably prudent person in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of others was in danger.” State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 20 (La.10/16/07), (citations omitted).
State v. Gray 101 So. 3d 515 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Similarly, in State v. Boyer, 2007-0476 (La.10/16/07), , the Louisiana Supreme Court sanctioned a pat down for weapons following a comparable restraint of the defendant, who was forced to the ground and placed in handcuffs while the officer frisked him for weapons.
State v. Cure 93 So. 3d 1268 La. 2012
searches conducted by the police “is not whether the police officer subjectively believes he is in danger, or whether he articulates that subjective belief in his testimony at a suppression hearing,” but whether “a reasonably prudent person in the circumstances would be warranted in the belief that his safety or that of other [persons] was in danger.” State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 20 (La.10/16/07), (citations omitted); cf. Sylvester, 01-0607 at 6, 826 So.2d at 1109 (“[T]he officer’s concern for hi
State v. Walls 86 So. 3d 71 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); State v. Boyer, 2007-0476 (La.10/16/07), .
State v. Green 79 So. 3d 1013 La. 2012
State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 20 (La.10/16/07), (“The relevant question is not whether the police officer subjectively believes he is in danger, or whether he articulates that subjective belief in his testimony at a suppression hearing....
State ex rel. J.H. 83 So. 3d 1100 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Boyer, 07-0476, pp. 17-18 (La.10/16/07), -70 .
State v. Simpson 77 So. 3d 445 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
The “plain feel” exception to the warrant requirement was addressed by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Boyer, 2007-0476 (La.10/16/07), : In Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366, 371 , 113 S.Ct.
State v. Fortune 72 So. 3d 1000 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); State v. Boyer, 2007-0476 (La.10/16/07), .
State v. Marshall 70 So. 3d 1106 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968); State v. Boyer, 2007-0476 (La.10/16/07), .
State v. Sander 69 So. 3d 730 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
The “plain feel” exception to the warrant requirement was addressed by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 22 (La.10/16/07), , 472: In Minnesota v. Dickerson, 508 U.S. 366, 371 , 113 S.Ct.
State v. Parker 71 So. 3d 383 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Boyer, 07-0476, pp. 17-18 (La.10/16/07), -70 (quotations omitted; citations to quoted material omitted).
State v. Suggs 70 So. 3d 60 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
at 1883 ; State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 20 (La.10/16/07), .
State v. Dickerson 65 So. 3d 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Boyer, 07-0476 (La.10/16/07), -70 .
State v. Francis 60 So. 3d 703 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Cf., State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 21 (La.10/16/07), .
State v. Welch 59 So. 3d 441 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Per State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 7 (La.10/16/07), , 464: “The Fourth Amendment, applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, protects ‘[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated....
State v. Huntley 60 So. 3d 644 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Boyer, 07-476, p. 17 (La.10/16/07), -70 .
State v. Robinson 38 So. 3d 1138 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
“When executing a search warrant, officers may briefly detain persons who are present, regardless of their occupancy status with regard to the subject property, if the police possess the minimal level of objective justification for an investigatory stop based on reasonable suspicion of [ r,criminal activity.” State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 20 (La.10/16/07), .
State v. Hamilton 36 So. 3d 209 La. 2010
Cf. State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 21 (La.10/16/07), (“Officer Guillot[] was trained for the purpose of officer safety, to order persons in these situations to remove their hands from their pockets ....
State v. Loeb 34 So. 3d 917 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Boyer, 07-476 (La.10/16/07), (quotations omitted; citations to quoted material omitted).
State v. Brown 30 So. 3d 907 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
at 1883; State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 20 (La.10/16/07), .
State v. Thomas 8 So. 3d 646 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
2130, 2134 , 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993); State v. Boyer, 07-0476, p. 22 (La.10/16/07), .
State v. Ayche 978 So. 2d 1143 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
State v. Boyer, 07-0476 (La.10/16/07), (citations omitted).