Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Weston, 95 So. 2d 305.

25 citing documents.

State v. Young 480 So. 2d 434 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Lovett 359 So. 2d 163 La. 1978
(1957) and State v. Nails, 255 La.
State v. Bolton 337 So. 2d 446 La. 1976
State v. Babin 319 So. 2d 367 La. 1975
Criticized State v. Taylor 282 So. 2d 491 La. 1973
(1957), upholding the denial of a challenge for cause of the juror who answered the question.
State v. Gladden 257 So. 2d 388 La. 1972
State v. Mitchell 246 So. 2d 814 La. 1971
cited by counsel for the defendant, is *447 not apposite to the present matter.
State ex rel. Barksdale v. Henderson 242 So. 2d 886 La. 1971
State v. Poland 232 So. 2d 499 La. 1970
State v. Whitfield 219 So. 2d 493 La. 1969
State v. Evans 192 So. 2d 103 La. 1966
Hence, the question presented under these bills is whether the judge abused his discretion in denying the' challenges for cause.” , .
State v. Cooper 190 So. 2d 86 La. 1966
919 ; (1966); , (1957); State v. Sbisa, 232 La.
State v. Carter 181 So. 2d 763 La. 1966
1036 , (1960); , (1957).
State v. Simpson 175 So. 2d 255 La. 1965
State v. Simpson 175 So. 2d 255 La. 1965
State v. Cloud 166 So. 2d 263 La. 1964
Overruled State v. Scott 141 So. 2d 389 La. 1962
The trial court ruled that, “The juror is not required to answer would he bring in any kind of verdict under any set of circumstances, but the question as to whether he could do so or not I believe is permissible and the objection is overruled.” ■ Counsel for the defendant relies upon the following statement from the case óf , : “In fact, the use of the verbs 'would’ or ‘could’ in examinations of this sort are not strictly correct for it is highly improper to ask a juror if he would act in such
State v. Norris 141 So. 2d 368 La. 1962
593 , , State v. Weston, Jr., , .
State v. Rogers 132 So. 2d 819 La. 1961
Hence, the question presented under these bills is whether the judge abused his discretion in denying the challenges for cause.” , .
State v. Newton 128 So. 2d 651 La. 1961
642 , and State v. Weston, Jr., , .
State v. Wilson 127 So. 2d 158 La. 1961
State v. Stewart 117 So. 2d 583 La. 1960
11; , , and authorities there cited.
State v. Savell 116 So. 2d 513 La. 1959
State ex rel. Weston v. Walker 107 So. 2d 298 La. 1958
State v. Sbisa 95 So. 2d 619 La. 1957
Assuming that the proper foundation was laid ( , ), appellant would, in my opinion, be entitled to a new trial on his Bill of Exceptions No. 4, which was taken to the ruling of the court in refusing to require the State to produce the statement which had been given by the main prosecuting witness, Sergeant John Edward Bray, to Guy Bannister, Assistant