DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Harris, 694 So. 2d 626.

27 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Steven Ray Killingsworth La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
    App. 2 Cir. 5/7/97), for the proposition that when a motion for 7 continuance is granted the same day that it is filed, the prescriptive period of Art. 578 was not suspended.
  • State v. Barnett 174 So. 3d 748 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
    P. art. 532(7); State v. Rome, 93-1221 (La.01/14/94), ; State v. Lathan, 41,855 (La.App.2d Cir.02/28/07), , writ denied, 07-0805 (La.03/28/08), ; State v. Harris, 29, 574 (La.App.2d Cir.05/07/97), .
  • State v. Price 156 So. 3d 68 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
  • State v. Logan 34 So. 3d 528 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    P. art. 578(2); State v. McDonald, 30,854 (La.App.2d Cir.8/19/98), ; State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), .
  • State v. Yates 15 So. 3d 1260 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    P. art. 578(2); State v. McDonald, 30,854 (La.App.2d Cir.8/19/98), ; State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), .
  • State v. Tillman 997 So. 2d 144 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    2 Cir. 5/7/97), ; State v. Rome, supra .
  • State v. Lathan 953 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
  • State v. Goins 920 So. 2d 375 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), .
  • State v. Jackson 916 So. 2d 1274 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    P. art. 578(2); State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.05/07/97), .
  • State v. Anderson 889 So. 2d 1237 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Divers 889 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    3d Cir.10/8/97), , writ denied, 1997-2845 (La.3/13/98), ; State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), .
  • State v. Allen 871 So. 2d 1097 La. 2004
    App. 2 Cir. 5/7/97), , which held that a conviction and the defendant's subsequent efforts to overturn it on direct appeal neither suspend nor interrupt the running of the time limitation of Article 578.
  • State v. Washington 846 So. 2d 723 La. 2003
  • State v. Washington 846 So. 2d 723 La. 2003
  • State v. Ward 830 So. 2d 1135 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
  • State v. Erven 830 So. 2d 368 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), .
  • State v. Woodard 799 So. 2d 701 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    In State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), , the state contended that once the joint motion for continuance was granted, the prescriptive time period for commencing trial was interrupted.
  • State v. Oliver 786 So. 2d 317 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
  • State v. Jones 780 So. 2d 1234 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), .
  • State v. Duncan 771 So. 2d 254 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    State v. Duncan, supra; State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), .
  • State v. Morris 755 So. 2d 205 La. 2000
    2nd Cir. 5/7/97), ("Contrary to the state's contention, the prescriptive period is suspended when the preliminary motion is filed, not when it is ruled upon by the trial court.").
  • State v. Pratt 748 So. 2d 25 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
  • State v. Etienne 734 So. 2d 709 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    2 Cir. 5/7/97); ; State v. Williams, 93-694 (La.App.
  • State v. McDonald 718 So. 2d 542 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
    art. 578(2); State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir.5/7/97), .
  • State v. Mack 716 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
    art. 578(2); State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir. 5/7/97), .
  • State v. Campbell 715 So. 2d 488 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
  • State v. Duncan 702 So. 2d 328 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
    State v. Harris, 29,574 (La.App.2d Cir. 5/7/97), .