Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Johnson, 82 So. 2d 24.

39 citing documents.

State v. Beaulieu 122 So. 3d 1050 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
(1955); State v. Kreller, 255 La.
State v. Cinel 646 So. 2d 309 La. 1994
See, , (1955) (possession of marijuana); State v. Roufa, 241 La.
State v. Abercrombie 375 So. 2d 1170 La. 1979
-98 (La.1976); , (1955).
State v. Slayton 338 So. 2d 694 La. 1976
[6] Thus, , (1955), the leading decision permitting use of extraneous offenses to prove "guilty knowledge" in narcotics cases, the undoubted possessor of marijuana, found in gleanings in his clothes, claimed not to know of them.
Explained State v. Mims 330 So. 2d 905 La. 1976
The law in this area was first set out by this Court in 1955 , (1955) in which we explained: "The word `possession' means simply the owning or having in one's power; to have and to hold as property; ownership, whether rightfully or wrongfully; actual personal control and care; the right of exercising acts of dominion.
State v. Malmay 315 So. 2d 286 La. 1975
(1955), this Court has repeatedly stated that possession and distribution of illegal drugs "* * * as denounced by law cannot exist without proof of guilty knowledge * * *."
State v. Gaspard 301 So. 2d 344 La. 1974
State v. Tharp 284 So. 2d 536 La. 1973
Relative to guilty knowledge being an essential ingredient of the crime of possession or distribution of narcotic drugs and narcoti paraphernalia, , (1955); State v. Maney, 242 La.
State v. Moore 278 So. 2d 781 La. 1973
14:27; , (1955); State v. Ferrand, supra.
State v. Scott 278 So. 2d 121 La. 1973
State v. Clouatre 264 So. 2d 595 La. 1972
(1955), affirmatively settles the question that guilty knowledge is an essential element of the crime of possession of narcotic drugs.
State v. Crittle 268 So. 2d 604 La. 1972
65 , (1955); , (1955); State v. Maney, 242 La.
State v. Barnes 245 So. 2d 159 La. 1971
65 , ; State v. Johnson (on rehearing), , ; State v. Maney, 242 La.
State v. Kreller 233 So. 2d 906 La. 1970
1 State v. Maney, 242 La.
State v. O'BRIEN 232 So. 2d 484 La. 1970
(on rehearing) (1955) ; State v. Maney, 242 La.
State v. Clack 222 So. 2d 857 La. 1969
The crime of unlawful possession of narcotic drugs as denounced by law cannot exist without proof of guilty knowledge; for, such possession would not be a possession contemplated by the statute.” , .
State v. Vale 215 So. 2d 811 La. 1968
In fact, we find, “It is conceded that this Court has held ‘track marks’ are admissible’ to show guilty knowledge in a possession case.” See, , ; State v. Harris, 232 La.
State v. Gurney 185 So. 2d 19 La. 1966
993 , (1947) , (1955)), the change of date in this instance, coupled with the change in the object of the theft, adds support to defendant's claim of prejudice.
State v. Oliver 174 So. 2d 509 La. 1965
65 , ; , (on rehearing); see also State v. Harris, 232 La.
State v. Oliver 174 So. 2d 509 La. 1965
65 , ; , (on rehearing); see also State v. Harris, 232 La.
State v. Pailet 165 So. 2d 294 La. 1964
374 ; , (on rehearing) ; State v. Wagner, 229 La.
State v. McIlvaine 160 So. 2d 566 La. 1964
65 , ; , ; State v. Maney, 242 La.
State v. McIlvaine 160 So. 2d 566 La. 1964
65 , ; , ; State v. Maney, 242 La.
Overruled State v. Sciortino 159 So. 2d 685 La. 1964
See also 5 Wharton’s Criminal Law and Procedure, pp. 210-212 (Anderson, 1957).
State v. Richard 158 So. 2d 828 La. 1963
State v. Morris 157 So. 2d 728 La. 1963
640 , , , State v. Wagner, 229 La.
State v. Morris 157 So. 2d 728 La. 1963
640 , , , State v. Wagner, 229 La.
State Ex Rel. Blouin v. Walker 154 So. 2d 368 La. 1963
which involved a charge of unlawful possession of narcotics, that: “Unlawful possession, where one is invested with some right of dominion, can be defined as a possession which in the ordinary course of human experience necessarily involves knowledge of the fact that one is possessing either rightfully
State v. Maney 135 So. 2d 473 La. 1961
wherein the rule was announced that guilty knowledge is an essential ingredient of the crime of possession of narcotic drugs under LSA-R.S.
State v. Copling 135 So. 2d 271 La. 1961
615 ; and, also, , ; State v. Roshto, 169 La.
State v. Roufa 129 So. 2d 743 La. 1961
we had announced the principle that no crime can exist without the combination of a criminal act and a criminal intent, or an evil motive, or with a guilty knowledge of its consequences.
State v. Wilson 127 So. 2d 158 La. 1961
966 ; , ; State v. Blankenship, 231 La.
State v. Garner 115 So. 2d 855 La. 1959
Johnson v. Sigler 106 So. 2d 469 La. 1958
State v. Harris 95 So. 2d 496 La. 1957
15 :445, 15:446; , ; State v. Reinhardt, 229 La.
State v. Birdsell 95 So. 2d 290 La. 1957
we held that unlawful possession, where one is invested with some right of dominion, can be defined as a possession which in the ordinary course of human experience necessarily involves knowledge of the fact that one is possessing either rightfully or unlawfully as well as with knowledge of the crimina
State v. Dartez 89 So. 2d 48 La. 1956
d to it and made a part thereof, this bill is without merit.- Both the motion in arrest of judg-' ment, Bill of Exception No. 4, and the motion for a new trial, Bill of Exception No. 5, present the same question, viz.: that the bill of information does not specifically and affirmatively charge or impute guilty knowledge of the accused of possession of a narcotic drug, , .
State v. Peltier 86 So. 2d 693 La. 1956
The remainder of the 'possible verdicts which the judge stated might be rendered dealt with “attempted” acts — attempted possession, attempted control, , , this court, in ruling admissible certain evidence as tending to show guilty knowledge, held that “attempted possession” was a responsive verdict to a charge of possession of narcotics.
State v. Wagner 85 So. 2d 272 La. 1956
In State v. Johnson, on rehearing, , , wherein the defendant was charged with possession of narcotics, this Court 'pointed out that the commission of a prior offense was admissible to show guilty knowledge or evil motive.