Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Balsano, 11 So. 3d 475.

21 citing documents.

State of Louisiana Versus Sarah Tyner La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2025
6/19/09), (per curiam), the Louisiana Supreme Court held that for guilty pleas entered in Louisiana before December 8, 1971, and for all non-Louisiana guilty pleas used to enhance a defendant’s sentence following a subsequent conviction, a defendant does not satisfy his burden of proof on collateral attack merely by pr
State of Louisiana Versus Joel J. Faucheux, Jr. La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. George Joseph La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
6/19/09), the defendant was charged with fourth offense DWI with the three prior convictions being obtained in a single plea proceeding.
State Of Louisiana v. Aaron Wayne Bush La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
6/ 19/ 09), - 84 ( per curiam), the defendant challenged the validity of an out-of-state guilty plea used to enhance his DWI conviction.
State of Louisiana v. Desmond C. Parker La. 2019
6/19/09), this court, in the course of examining the validity of out-of-state guilty pleas used for habitual offender prosecutions, announced the return of this state’s jurisprudence “to its original substantive aspect,” explaining that, henceforth, “for all non-Louisiana guilty pleas, used to enhance sentence following a
State of Louisiana v. Curtis Cheley La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
State v. Cheley 237 So. 3d 58 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Cheatham 222 So. 3d 757 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State v. Casaday 223 So. 3d 108 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
State v. E.J.M. 167 So. 3d 79 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
The Louisiana Supreme Court, in granting the State’s application for writ of review, found that pursuant to State v. Balsam, 09-735 (La.6/19/09), , ...
State v. Smith 167 So. 3d 736 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In State v. Balsano, 2009-0735 (La.6/19/09), -84 (per curiam), the defendant challenged the validity of an out-of-state plea used to enhance his driving-while-intoxicated conviction.
State v. Watkins 146 So. 3d 294 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In State v. Balsano, 09-0735 (La.6/19/09), , the Court expressly held that for “all non-Louisiana guilty pleas [] used to enhance sentence following a subsequent conviction, a defendant does not satisfy his burden of proof on collateral attack merely by presenting contemporaneous records revealing” that he was not informed of and specifically waived his right
State v. Hager 148 So. 3d 615 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Citing State v. Balsano, 09-735 (La.6/19/09), , the supreme court stated that the defendant “failed to produce any affirmative evidence that the contemporaneous statements of counsel on the waiver form did not reliably establish the knowing and voluntary [sic] of the guilty plea as a waiver of the enumerated trial rights both he and counsel acknowledged by signin
State v. Marlbrough 138 So. 3d 65 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In State v. Balsano, 09-0735 (La.6/19/09), (per curiam ), the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized that it has consistently allowed defendants to attack collaterally the validity of guilty pleas used to enhance their sentences, whether in habitual offender proceedings under La.
State v. Morgan 134 So. 3d 1160 La. 2014
This Court made clear in State v. Balsano, 09-0735 (La.6/19/09), , that for out-of-state guilty pleas, a defendant must show more than a technical violation of this Court’s three-right prophylactic Boykin rule meant to facilitate the taking of voluntary guilty pleas in Louisiana and demonstrate that the guilty plea did not reflect a knowing and voluntary waiver of trial.
State v. Boudreaux 131 So. 3d 342 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
In State v. Balsano, 09-0735, p. 8 (La.6/19/09), (per curiam), the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized that it has consistently allowed defendants to attack collaterally the validity of guilty pleas used to enhance their sentences, whether in habitual offender proceedings under La.
State v. Mendoza 113 So. 3d 288 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2013
In State v. Balsano, 09-0735, p. 8 (La.6/19/09), (per curiam), the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized that it has consistently allowed defendants to attack collaterally the validity of guilty pleas used to enhance their sentences, whether in habitual offender proceedings, or in habitual offender DWI prosecutions.
State v. Dillon 101 So. 3d 970 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2012
In State v. Balsano, 09-0735 (La.6/19/09), (per curiam), the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized that, in many cases, prior DWI convictions used to enhance sentences are misdemeanor offenses in which the defendant does not have the right to a jury trial, shrinking the three-right rule to two rights.
State v. Rosales 94 So. 3d 36 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2012
In State v. Balsano, 09-0735, p. 8 (La.6/19/09); (per curiam), the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized that it has consistently allowed defendants to attack collaterally the validity of guilty pleas used to enhance their sentences, whether in habitual offender proceedings under LSA-R.S.
State v. Domino 60 So. 3d 659 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
In State v. Balsano, 09-0735, p. 8 (La.6/19/09), (per cu-riam), the Louisiana Supreme Court recognized that it has consistently allowed defendants to attack collaterally the validity of guilty pleas used to enhance their sentences, whether in habitual offender proceedings under LSA-R.S.
State v. Woods 38 So. 3d 391 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Recently, in State v. Balsano, 09-735 (La.6/19/09), , the Louisiana Supreme Court noted that for guilty pleas entered in Louisiana before December 8, 1971, and for all non-Louisiana guilty pleas used to enhance a defendant's sentence following a subsequent conviction, a defendant does not satisfy his burden of proof on collateral attack merely by presenting contemporan