Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Honeycutt, 44 So. 2d 313.

30 citing documents.

State v. Gachot 609 So. 2d 269 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
State v. Murray 546 So. 2d 944 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
State v. Nuccio 454 So. 2d 93 La. 1984
In Davis , , (1950): "...
State v. Davis 380 So. 2d 607 La. 1980
The proper procedure for the state to follow in such a , (1950): "...
State v. Hills 354 So. 2d 186 La. 1978
323 , (1965); , (1950); State v. Robinson, 215 La.
State v. Simmons 340 So. 2d 1357 La. 1976
State v. Payne 338 So. 2d 682 La. 1976
323 , (1965); , (1950); State v. Robinson, 215 La.
State v. Carson 336 So. 2d 844 La. 1976
State v. Simmons 328 So. 2d 149 La. 1976
323 , (1965); , (1950); State v. Robinson, 215 La.
State v. White 321 So. 2d 491 La. 1975
See State v. Peters, La., (1975); State v. Monroe, La., (1974); , (1950).
State v. Whatley 320 So. 2d 123 La. 1975
323 , (1965); , (1950); State v. Robinson, 215 La.
State v. Peters 315 So. 2d 678 La. 1975
(1950), we again concluded that the State had not offered sufficient proof of the confession's voluntary character to sustain the trial court's admission of his statement.
State v. Sims 310 So. 2d 587 La. 1975
323 , (1965); , (1950); State v. Robinson, 215 La.
State v. Monroe 305 So. 2d 902 La. 1974
(1950) and State v. Simien, 248 La.
State v. Lacoste 237 So. 2d 871 La. 1970
State v. Collins 217 So. 2d 182 La. 1968
15:451, 3 this Court has held in a long list of cases too numerous to cite that the burden of proof rests with the state to show by a clear preponderance of evidence (and in some cases it is held that the state is obliged to establish beyond a reasonable doubt — , ; State v. Ferguson, 240 La.
State v. Ragsdale 187 So. 2d 427 La. 1966
State v. Carter 181 So. 2d 763 La. 1966
See, for example, , ; and State v. Ferguson, 240 La.
State v. Simien 178 So. 2d 266 La. 1965
the sole question before this court was whether *269 the evidence adduced by the State affirmatively showed that the confession there involved was freely and voluntarily made; that is to say, the question for decision was whether the State had discharged the burden of proving the confession admissible
State v. Scott 141 So. 2d 389 La. 1962
766 , , we said, “it is established by our jurisprudence that, before what purports to be a confession can be received in evidence, it must be shown by proof which convinces beyond a reasonable doubt that it is voluntary.” With respect to the burden of proof, , 44 So'.2d 313, “Under these provisions of our law, for a confession to be admissible in evidence against an accused in any criminal cáse; the burden of proof is on the State to show that such confession was freely and voluntarily given an
State v. Thomas 135 So. 2d 275 La. 1961
974 , ; , ; State v. Joseph, 217 La.
State v. Rogers 132 So. 2d 819 La. 1961
974 , ; , ; State v. Green, 221 La.
State v. Davis 132 So. 2d 866 La. 1961
974 , , , (see State v. Savell, 238 La.
State v. Wilson 127 So. 2d 158 La. 1961
974 , ; , ; State v. Green, 221 La.
State v. Savell 116 So. 2d 513 La. 1959
910 ; , ; State v. Green, 221 La.
State v. Harris 95 So. 2d 496 La. 1957
State v. Weston 95 So. 2d 305 La. 1957
974 , ; , ; State v. Green, 221 La.
State v. Robinson 58 So. 2d 408 La. 1952
*36 Counsel is here contending, however, , , that the confession was illegally admitted since the state did not rebut his traverse of the testimony of the officers who laid the predicate for the admission of this oral confession.
State v. Honeycutt 49 So. 2d 610 La. 1950
State v. Jugger 47 So. 2d 46 La. 1950
317 , , , , where the convictions were set aside because the State failed to prove that the confession was free and voluntary.