Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Bertrand, 6 So. 3d 738.

195 citing documents.

State v. Williams 181 So. 3d 857 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
In State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311 (La.3/17/09), , the supreme court reiterated that Article 782 withstands constitutional scrutiny.
State ex rel. Lloyd v. State 177 So. 3d 1057 La. 2015
1620, 1622 , 32 L.Ed.2d 152 (1972); State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, p. 7 (La.3/17/09), .
State v. Brown 173 So. 3d 1262 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09), -43 ; State v. Raymond, 08-1204, pp. 23-24 (La.App.
State v. Bernard 171 So. 3d 1063 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Further, in State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09), , the Louisiana Supreme Court held non-unanimous jury verdicts were not l^unconstitutional.
State v. Mack 162 So. 3d 1284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
3020 , 177 L.Ed.2d 894 (2010)(recognizing Apodaca’s continuing viability 5 ); State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09), ; State v. Curtis, 2011-1676 (La.App.
State v. Ellis 161 So. 3d 64 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
5 See State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215, p. 8 (La.3/17/09), (“Due to this Court’s prior determinations that Article 782 withstands constitutional scrutiny, and because we are not presumptuous enough to suppose, upon mere speculation, that the United States Supreme Court’s still valid determination that non-unanimous 12 person jury verdicts are constitutional may someday b
State v. Flores 167 So. 3d 801 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311 (La.3/17/09), , the Louisiana Supreme Court specifically reversed a district court ruling which found La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Frith 151 So. 3d 946 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09), , the Louisiana Supreme Court effectively rejected the defendant’s argument that the use of non-unanimous jury verdicts has a disparate impact on minorities.
State v. Fields 151 So. 3d 756 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
See State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, p. 8 (La.3/17/09), ; State v. Hankton, 12-0375, pp. 7-8 (La.App.
State v. Hatfield 155 So. 3d 572 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
See State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215, 2008-2311, p. 8 (La.3/17/09), ; State v. Hankton, 2012-0375, p. 7 (La.App.
State of Louisiana v. Daniel Joseph Harmon La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
State v. Harmon 139 So. 3d 1195 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311 (La.3/17/09)
State v. Wilmot 142 So. 3d 141 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311 (La.3/17/09), , the Louisiana Supreme Court specifically reversed a district court ruling which found LSA-C.Cr.P.
State v. Blueford 137 So. 3d 54 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
P. art. 782(A) provides, in part, that “Cases in which punishment is necessarily confinement at hard labor shall be tried by a jury composed of twelve jurors, ten of whom must concur to render a verdict.” The Louisiana Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of this rule; see State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09), , and as recently as 2013, the United States Supreme Court has declined to review the practice.
State v. Huey 142 So. 3d 27 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Our supreme court in State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09), , addressed this issue over four years ago: “Finally, 110defendants argue that the use of non-unanimous verdicts have an insidious racial component, allow minority viewpoints to be ignored, and is likely to chill participation by the precise groups whose exclusion the Constitution has proscribed.” Id.
State v. Dorsey 137 So. 3d 651 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
See State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09), -43 ; State v. Smith, 06-0820 (La.App.
State v. Webb 133 So. 3d 258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Moreover, in State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09), , the Louisiana Supreme Court effectively rejected the defendant’s argument that the use of non-unanimous jury verdicts has a disparate impact on minorities.
State v. Jones 131 So. 3d 1065 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09), .
State of Louisiana v. Justin Robert Sizemore La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Sizemore 129 So. 3d 860 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
We observe that the Louisiana supreme court rejected this contention in State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311 (La.3/17/09), .
State v. Norah 131 So. 3d 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
1628 , 32 L.Ed.2d 184 (1972); State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, p. 8 (La.3/17/09), ; State v. Lawrence, 09-1637, pp. 18-19 (La.App.
State of Louisiana v. Jessie James Duplantis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Duplantis 127 So. 3d 143 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09)
State v. Hankton 122 So. 3d 1028 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
5 See State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311, p. 8 (La.3/17/09), (“With respect to that ruling, it should go without saying that a trial judge is not at liberty to ignore the controlling jurisprudence of superior courts.”) We too have abided by the Bertrand instruction.
State v. Santos-Castro 120 So. 3d 933 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
See State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, p. 8 (La.3/17/09), ; State v. Bonds, 11-1674, pp. 2-3 (La.App.
State v. Fields 120 So. 3d 309 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
See State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311 (La.3/17/09), , and its progeny.
State v. Marcelin 116 So. 3d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
In State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311 (La.3/17/09), , the trial court found that La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Napoleon 119 So. 3d 238 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
In State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09), , the Louisiana Supreme Court held non-unanimous jury verdicts were not unconstitutional, due to its prior holdings that La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Jackson 115 So. 3d 1155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Although the defendant makes a well-reasoned and compelling argument in support of his position that there are disparities inherent in non-unanimous juries that should be remedied, this Court is constrained by the most recent pronouncement of the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, p. 8 (La.3/17/09), , which upheld the constitutionality of Article 782.
State of Louisiana v. Randall C. Thompson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
3/17/09), and upheld the constitutionality of La.Code Crim.P.
State v. Thompson 111 So. 3d 580 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
The Louisiana Supreme Court considered this exact issue in State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311 (La.3/17/09), , and upheld the constitutionality of La.
State v. Hammond 115 So. 3d 513 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
See State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215, pp. 6-7 (La.3/17/09), -43 ; State v. Smith, 2006-0820, pp. 23-24 (La.App.
State v. Lewis 112 So. 3d 796 La. 2013
In a similar vein, citing State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215, p. 6 (La.3/17/09), , the court found defendant’s assertion that non-unanimous jury verdicts violate his right to a jury trial under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments unavailing.
State v. Overstreet 111 So. 3d 308 La. 2013
Following Hatton , this Court in State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09), , found as a preliminary matter that a district court erred in declaring La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Krodinger 128 So. 3d 270 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
In State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215, 2008-2311 (La.3/17/09), , the trial court found that La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Galle 107 So. 3d 916 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
See State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215, p. 8 *934 (La.3/17/09), (“Due to this Court’s prior determinations that Article 782 withstands constitutional scrutiny, and because we are not presumptuous enough to suppose, upon mere speculation, that the United States Supreme Court’s still valid determination that non-unanimous 12 person jury verdicts are constitutional may someday b
State v. Thomas 106 So. 3d 665 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09), .
State v. Sanders 104 So. 3d 619 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09), ; State v. Boudreaux, 08-1504 (La.App.
State v. Hugle 104 So. 3d 598 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 9/29/10), , this Court noted: In State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09), , the trial court found that La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Brooks 103 So. 3d 608 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
In State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09), , the Louisiana Supreme Court reversed a district court ruling that La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Bonds 101 So. 3d 531 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Bertrand, 08-2215, 08-2311 (La.3/17/09), ; State v. Boudreaux, 08-1504 (La.App.
State v. Williams 101 So. 3d 104 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 9/29/10) , , writ denied, 2010-2434 (La.4/8/11), , this Court noted: In State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09), , the trial court found that La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Barnes 100 So. 3d 926 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215, p. 6 (La.3/17/09), , 742 and progeny.
State v. Henry 103 So. 3d 424 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.03/17/09), .
State v. Smith 96 So. 3d 678 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Id., 2008-2215, p. 8 (La.3/17/09), .
State v. Mitchell 97 So. 3d 494 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Bertrand, 08-2215 (La.3/17/09), .
Explained State v. Williams 93 So. 3d 830 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09)
State v. Everett 96 So. 3d 605 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 9/29/10) , , this court noted: In State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215 (La.3/17/09), , the trial court found that La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Lewis 96 So. 3d 1165 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
As the Court stated in State v. Bertrand, 2008-2215, p. 6 (La.3/17/09), , under current jurisprudence from the United States Supreme Court, non-unanimous twelve-person jury verdicts are non-violative of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments.
State v. Anderson 85 So. 3d 747 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
art. 782(A) violates the Fifth, Sixth or Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, citing State v. Bertrand, 2008-2811 (La.3/17/09), , and State v. Barbour, 2009-1258 (La.App.