Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Mills, 86 So. 2d 895.

33 citing documents.

State v. Bay 529 So. 2d 845 La. 1988
See, , (1956); State v. Hendon, 170 La.
Carpenter v. Besco Corp. 521 So. 2d 421 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
15:466; , [ (La.1956) ] (syllabus 8).” The question, therefore, narrows itself to whether the trial judge abused his discretion in maintaining the defense’s objections, thus preventing the expert from expressing his opinion as to why the accident happened.
Neumeyer v. Terral 478 So. 2d 1281 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
15:466; , (syllabus 8)."
Succession of Armshaw v. Succession of Marbury 428 So. 2d 1180 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
15:466; , (syllabus 8)."
State v. Sanchez 284 So. 2d 918 La. 1973
Under the hearing “Argument on Bill of Exception #1” the defendant’s brief contains only the statement: “Bill of Exceptions No. 1 is submitted wihout argument.” , (1956), we said: “Mills’ bills Nos. 2, 3, 5, 8 and 12 were submitted to this Court without oral argument or discussion in brief, and without citation of authorities.
State v. Crothers 278 So. 2d 12 La. 1973
Jennings v. Allstate Insurance Company 273 So. 2d 534 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1973
15:466; , (syllabus 8)."
State v. St. Andre 267 So. 2d 190 La. 1972
State v. Edwards 261 So. 2d 649 La. 1972
Under the heading “Argument on Bill of Exception # 1” the defendant’s brief contains only the statement: “Bill of Exception No. 1 is submitted without argument.” , (1956), we said: “Mills Bills Nos. 2, 3, 5, 8, and 12 were submitted to this court without oral argument 'or disfcussion in brief, and without citation of authorities.
State v. Anderson 259 So. 2d 310 La. 1972
673 , ; , ; State v. LaCoste, 256 La.
State v. Washington 236 So. 2d 23 La. 1970
649 , ; , ; State v. Dowdy, 217 La.
State v. Washington 236 So. 2d 23 La. 1970
649 , ; , ; State v. Dowdy, 217 La.
State v. Alexander 211 So. 2d 650 La. 1968
649 , ; , , cert, denied Vernaci v. State of Louisiana, 352 U.S. 834 , 77 S.Ct.
State v. Andrus 199 So. 2d 867 La. 1967
State v. Bourg 182 So. 2d 510 La. 1966
198 , (1965); , (1956); State v. Mines, 137 La.
Carvell v. Winn 154 So. 2d 788 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1963
State v. Garrison 154 So. 2d 400 La. 1963
“ * * * The State is not required to reveal in advance of the trial the facts on which it will rely in seeking a conviction.” , , Cert.
State v. Copling 135 So. 2d 271 La. 1961
State v. Minor 129 So. 2d 10 La. 1961
960 , ; , , and State v. Williams, 230 La.
State v. Newton 128 So. 2d 651 La. 1961
960 , ; , ; State v. Williams, Jr., 230 La.
State v. Wilson 127 So. 2d 158 La. 1961
State v. Kelly 112 So. 2d 674 La. 1959
690 , ; , ; State v. Crovetto, 229 La.
State v. Clements 100 So. 2d 892 La. 1958
State v. Ford 99 So. 2d 320 La. 1957
State v. Eubanks 94 So. 2d 262 La. 1957
State v. Peart 93 So. 2d 920 La. 1957
State v. Coffil, 222 La.
State v. Smith 92 So. 2d 569 La. 1957
773 , , , and State v. Compagno, 230 La.
State v. Compagno 89 So. 2d 158 La. 1956
we said: “* * * It is well settled that the trial judge determines whether witnesses offered as experts are entitled to be heard in that capacity, and his ruling will not be disturbed on appeal where no error appears.
State v. Baum 88 So. 2d 209 La. 1956
690 , ; State v. Reinhardt, 229 La., 673 , ; , ; State v. Callia, 229 La.
State v. Mills 88 So. 2d 210 La. 1956
673 , ; , ; State v. Callia and Habeney, 229 La.
State v. Dominguez 88 So. 2d 660 La. 1956
and State v. Callia, 229 La.
State v. Forsyth 87 So. 2d 608 La. 1956
673 , ; , ; State v. Callia, 229 La.
State v. Callia 86 So. 2d 909 La. 1956