Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Driggers, 554 So. 2d 720.

28 citing documents.

State Of Louisiana v. Celito C. Jackson La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
State Of Louisiana v. James Matthew Cole La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
State of Louisiana v. William Felix Vail La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
837 (1938)] supra; State v. Driggers, supra [ (La.App.
State v. Vail 150 So. 3d 576 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
837 (1938)] supra; State v. Driggers, supra [ (La.App.
State v. Henry 102 So. 3d 1016 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Fisher 40 So. 3d 1020 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
was simply too prejudicial, a (La.App.
State v. Mills 806 So. 2d 59 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
The State also argues here, as it did in Kennedy , (La.App.
State v. Kennedy 803 So. 2d 916 La. 2001
State v. Zornes 774 So. 2d 1062 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
The trial court relied upon State v. Miller, 98 0301 (La.9/9/98), , (La.App.
State v. Dickerson 772 So. 2d 845 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
State v. Ponsell 766 So. 2d 678 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
State v. Plaisance 745 So. 2d 784 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
prior acts with juveniles were admitted to show the instant offense was not accidental and to establish defendant's lustful disposition.
State v. Miller 718 So. 2d 960 La. 1998
First, in discussing the probative value/undue prejudice analysis as applied to this type of evidence, (La.App.
State v. Lisotta 712 So. 2d 527 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
5th Cir. 1993); (La.App.
State v. Blackwell 701 So. 2d 1389 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
Here, the State seeks to present to the jury evidence of defendant's allegedly similar, though not identical, acts with girls other than the alleged victim to show that the defendant took advantage of one-on-one situations with juvenile, female members of his track team, that he was motivated to c
State v. Davis 702 So. 2d 1014 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
State v. McArthur 702 So. 2d 1047 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
837 (1938)]; State v. Driggers, supra [ (La.App.
State v. Eisbruckner 688 So. 2d 39 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
State v. Chapman 683 So. 2d 1236 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
In the sex crimes case, (La.App.
State v. Coleman 673 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
State v. Williams 672 So. 2d 1150 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
3rd Cir.1987), writ denied, (La.App.
State v. Crawford 672 So. 2d 197 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
State v. Cupit, supra; State v. Driggers, supra [ (La.App.
State v. Sturdivant 669 So. 2d 654 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
State v. Ham 652 So. 2d 15 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
3rd Cir.1987), writ denied, (La.App.
State v. Allen 647 So. 2d 428 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
For similar factual situations wherein prior sex crimes against other family members were found to be admissible, see also Jackson, supra ; (La.App.
State v. Broussard 649 So. 2d 726 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
State v. Jackson 625 So. 2d 146 La. 1993
State v. Tyler 619 So. 2d 807 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993