Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Holmes, 65 So. 2d 890.

20 citing documents.

State v. Gardner 844 So. 2d 1097 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
744 , [(1949)], , [(1953)], State v. Picou, 236 La.
State v. Clark 288 So. 2d 612 La. 1974
102 , (1961); , (1953); State v. Nichols, 216 La.
State v. Linkletter 286 So. 2d 321 La. 1973
In the State's brief, , (1953) and that the trial court, in its per curiam, based its ruling that the short form indictment was sufficient on State v. Taylor, 253 La.
State v. Smith 275 So. 2d 733 La. 1973
1082 , (1955) (illegal fishing device); , (1957) (neglected to state which "felony" accused burglar intended to commit); State v. Hebert, 205 La.
State v. Glover 263 So. 2d 866 La. 1972
to be the correct view under the facts presented in the case before us. There in reversing the conviction we held that in a prosecution under the short form bill of information for a crime which may be committed in several designated ways, the defendant is entitled upon request to be informed of the s
State v. Mann 202 So. 2d 259 La. 1967
744 , , , , State v. Picou, 236 La.
State v. Moody 173 So. 2d 195 La. 1965
257 , ; , ; State v. Scott, 223 La.
State v. McAllister 150 So. 2d 557 La. 1963
State v. Barnes 134 So. 2d 890 La. 1961
It was filed after the arraignment and five days prior to the trial.” , , 891 in which the defendant, charged with simple burglary by the short form, sought a hill of particulars to determine whether or not the intent of the accused was to commit a forcible felony or a theft, and if a forcible felony, the nature of it, this Court reversed the conviction and sentence of the
State v. Thomas 123 So. 2d 872 La. 1960
If the motion for the bill of particulars filed by appellant had specifically requested this information, there is no doubt that the judge would have been obliged to order the State to furnish it, , , where it was held that, in a prosecution under the short form for a crime which may be committed in several designated ways, the accused is entitled, upon his request, to be informed of the specific way or ways relied on by the State”.
State v. Eyer 110 So. 2d 521 La. 1959
257 , *59 ; , ; State v. Scott, 223 La.
State v. Scott 110 So. 2d 530 La. 1959
If the motion for the bill of particulars filed by appellant had specifically requested this information, there is no doubt that the judge would have been obliged to order the State to furnish it, , , where it was held that, in a prosecution under the short form for a crime which may be committed in several designated ways, the accused is entitled, upon his request, to be informed of the specific way or ways relied on by the State.
State v. Rowan 96 So. 2d 569 La. 1957
State v. Franks 89 So. 2d 39 La. 1956
The Celestin case, supra, , .
State v. Straughan 87 So. 2d 523 La. 1956
622 , ; , ; and State v. Roy, 40 N.M.
State v. Dugan 86 So. 2d 528 La. 1956
State v. McQueen 87 So. 2d 727 La. 1955
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 , 23 L.Ed.
State v. Blanchard 78 So. 2d 181 La. 1955
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 , 23 L.Ed.
State v. O'Brien 77 So. 2d 402 La. 1954
342 , , cited as authority by counsel for the defendant.
State v. Holmes 71 So. 2d 335 La. 1954