Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Di Vincenti, 93 So. 2d 676.
- State of Louisiana v. D. T. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
- State v. D.T. 998 So. 2d 1258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
- State v. DT 998 So. 2d 1258 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
-
State v. Stoltz
358 So. 2d 1249
La. 1978
15:466; (1976); , (1957).
-
State v. LeBlanc
297 So. 2d 433
La. 1974
533 , (1969); , (1957)."
- State v. Ford 254 So. 2d 457 La. 1971
-
State v. Davis
249 So. 2d 193
La. 1971
533 , (1969) ; , (1957).
- State v. Chapman 208 So. 2d 686 La. 1968
-
State v. Brown
202 So. 2d 274
La. 1967
See, , ; State v. Burkhalter, 211 La.
-
State v. Simmons
190 So. 2d 83
La. 1966
*653 This court, in State v. Forsythe, supra, , , in setting forth the rule to be prescribed in determining the admissibility of hearsay evidence as a part of the res gestae, quoted with approval the following statement from Wharton on Criminal Evidence: “In some states (Louisiana is one of these states), res gestae is given an even broader definitio
- State v. Forsythe 144 So. 2d 536 La. 1962
-
State v. Brown
136 So. 2d 394
La. 1962
State v. Melerine, 236 La.
- State v. Wilson 127 So. 2d 158 La. 1961
- State v. Melerine 109 So. 2d 471 La. 1959
- State v. Melerine 109 So. 2d 471 La. 1959
- State v. Jenkins 107 So. 2d 632 La. 1958
-
State v. Domino
102 So. 2d 227
La. 1958
In disposing of the merits of a , , involving a prosecution for gambling, we held that the testimony of one of the arresting officers with respect to the tenor and substance of telephone calls coming into the raided establishment, after the arrest, even though constituting hearsay, was admissible as testimony related to a matter constit