Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Walters, 630 So. 2d 1371.

16 citing documents.

State v. Free 127 So. 3d 956 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
State v. Walters, 25,587 (La.App.2d Cir [1/19/94),⅝, , writ denied, 95-0422 (La.6/16/95), ; State v. Oden-baugh, 2010-0268 (La.12/6/11), , cert, denied, — U.S.-, 133 S.Ct.
State v. Juniors 915 So. 2d 291 La. 2005
State v. Lowery 781 So. 2d 713 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
State v. Colomb, 98-2813 (La.10/1/99), ; State v. Walters, 25,587 (La.App.2d Cir.1/19/94), , appeal after remand, 26,647 (La.App.2d Cir.12/7/94), , writ denied, 95-0422 (La.6/16/95), ; State v. Scott, 31,379 (La.
State v. Scott 720 So. 2d 415 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
See footnote 2 to State v. Walters, 25,587 (La.App.2d Cir.1/19/94), , writ denied.
State v. Smith 710 So. 2d 1187 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
State v. Brown 702 So. 2d 744 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
App.2d Cir. 01/19/94), , writ denied 95-0422 (La.06/16/95), , *751 this court expressly held that no contemporaneous objection was required to evidence which the defendant had unsuccessfully sought to have excluded by a motion in limine.
State v. Caldwell 679 So. 2d 973 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
State v. Walters, 25,587 (La.App.2d Cir. 01/19/94), , rev. denied, 95-0422 (La.
State v. Crawford 672 So. 2d 197 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
2 Cir. 1/19/94); , appeal after remand on other grounds, 26,647 (La.App.
State v. Scott 669 So. 2d 664 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
2d Cir. 01/19/94), , writ denied, 95-0422 (La.
State v. Thomas 665 So. 2d 629 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
ion were: (1) an alleged erroneous definition of the crime of conviction, (2) an instruction allegedly containing a prohibited presumption, (3) an alleged erroneous instruction on the element of intent, State v. Walters, 25,587 (La.App.2d Cir. 1/19/94), ; and (4) an alleged erroneous instruction on reasonable doubt, State v. Cleveland, 25,628 (La.App.2d Cir. 1/19/94), .
State v. Freelon 655 So. 2d 687 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
State v. Walters, 25,587 (La.App.2d Cir. 01/19/94) (a case dealing with the correctness of a deviation from the sentencing guidelines but expressing the same concerns about the discrepancy between a defendant's actions and punishment).
State v. Smith 651 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
2d Cir. 01/19/94), , where this court held: [T]he res gestae doctrine in Louisiana is broad and includes not only spontaneous utterances and declarations made before and after the commission of the crime but also includes testimony of witnesses and police officers pertaining to what they heard or observed before, during, or after the co
State v. Harvey 649 So. 2d 783 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
2d Cir. 01/19/94), ; (La.App.
State v. Henderson 648 So. 2d 974 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
State v. Walters 648 So. 2d 7 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
2d Cir. 1/19/94), , but remanded for resentencing because the trial court did not adequately articulate sufficient valid aggravating circumstances to justify departing upward from the sentence recommended by the designated grid cell of the Louisiana Felony Sentencing Guidelines.
State v. Jordan 643 So. 2d 309 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
2d Cir. 1/19/94), , this court vacated a 21-year sentence for a first felony offender convicted of manslaughter because the aggravating factors listed by the trial court were insufficient to justify the imposition of the maximum penalty.