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. Brazile, 86 So. 2d 208.

16 citing documents.

  • State v. Claiborne 397 So. 2d 486 La. 1981
  • State v. Frazier 283 So. 2d 261 La. 1973
  • State v. Taylor 282 So. 2d 491 La. 1973
  • State v. Scott 278 So. 2d 121 La. 1973
    art. 401, 787; , (1956).
  • State v. Sheppard 268 So. 2d 590 La. 1972
    .” We have previously stated that what might be an improper question on voir dire *398 in one case might not be an improper question in another case; the discretion exercised by the trial judge in one case might not be the discretion exercised in another.
  • State v. Caldwell 206 So. 2d 492 La. 1968
    910 ; , ; and State v. Hills, 241 La.
  • State v. Simpson 175 So. 2d 255 La. 1965
    386 , and authorities cited; , ; State v. Weston, 232 La.
  • State v. Simpson 175 So. 2d 255 La. 1965
    386 , and authorities cited; , ; State v. Weston, 232 La.
  • State v. Odom 169 So. 2d 909 La. 1964
    03 , observed that, while the trial judge is granted latitude as to the questions which may or may not be answered on a voir dire examination, this 'discretion is subject to essential demands of fairness and that the examination “ * * * -cannot be limited so as to destroy or impair the constitutional and statutory rights of challenge for cause and peremptory challenge”' , and *86 State v. Hills, (on rehearing) 241 La.
  • State v. Rideau 137 So. 2d 283 La. 1962
    between the juror and the person injured, are such that it must be reasonably believed that they would influence the juror in coming to a verdict; “(3) That the juror served on the grand jury which found the indictment, or on a petit jury which once tried the defendant for the same offense, or on the coroner’s jury that investigated the homicide charged against the accused.” , , we cited with approval the following statement of law from State v. Henry, 200 La.
  • State v. Rogers 132 So. 2d 819 La. 1961
    His ruling is, however, subject to review; and while it will be *887 sustained unless the discretion allowed him is shown to have been unwisely exercised, nevertheless considerable latitude must of necessity be allowed in the examination of jurors and the trial judge is without right to unduly curtail that examination.” , .
  • State v. Newton 128 So. 2d 651 La. 1961
    “ * * * considerable latitude must of necessity be allowed in the examination of jurors and the trial judge is without right to unduly curtail that examination.” , .
  • State v. Wilson 127 So. 2d 158 La. 1961
    His ruling is, however, subject to review; and while it will be sustained unless the discretion allowed him is shown to have been unwisely exercised, nevertheless considerable latitude must of necessity be allowed in the examination of jurors and the trial judge is without right to unduly curtail that examination.” , .
  • State v. Brazile 99 So. 2d 62 La. 1958
    555 , ; , , which cases follow the ruling of State v. Jones cited above.” The fact that prospective jurors have impressions or opinions formed from reading of newspaper reports does not make them incompetent where such impressions are not fixed and will yield readily to the evidence adduced on the trial of the ca
  • State v. Sheffield 93 So. 2d 691 La. 1957
  • State v. Brazile 90 So. 2d 789 La. 1956