Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Wells, 221 So. 2d 50.

29 citing documents.

State of Louisiana Versus Eric James La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
Clement, 101 So.3d at 468, So.2d 50, 53 (1969).
State v. Clement 101 So. 3d 460 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Brown 32 So. 3d 939 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Lee 976 So. 2d 109 La. 2008
State v. McLeod 843 So. 2d 1268 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
State v. Rando 848 So. 2d 19 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
State v. Green 831 So. 2d 962 La. 2002
State v. Barrilleaux 620 So. 2d 1317 La. 1993
We granted defendant's application for certiorari, primarily to consider the rulings of the lower courts in the light of the "four corners" , (1969).
State v. Huffman 419 So. 2d 458 La. 1982
State v. Poree 406 So. 2d 546 La. 1981
art. 162; , Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct.
State v. Tranum 384 So. 2d 367 La. 1980
State v. Daniel 373 So. 2d 149 La. 1979
926 , , this Court took the position that the "clear and unmistakeable language of Article 162 requires ..."
State v. Case 363 So. 2d 486 La. 1978
(1969), this provision was interpreted to require an affidavit in all cases for a search warrant to issue: "A comparison of this article with its source provisions (LRS 15:42-44) now leaves no doubt but that a search warrant can legally issue in this state only when an affidavit has been submitted to th
State v. Barrett 350 So. 2d 664 La. 1977
1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964); , (1969).
State v. Brawley 347 So. 2d 238 La. 1977
State v. Tassin 343 So. 2d 681 La. 1977
State v. Hall 342 So. 2d 616 La. 1977
State v. Sierra 338 So. 2d 609 La. 1976
State v. Thomas 329 So. 2d 704 La. 1976
State v. Chaffin 324 So. 2d 369 La. 1975
State v. Roach 322 So. 2d 222 La. 1975
(1969), we likewise held that a search warrant was invalid when issued pursuant to an affidavit based on mere belief or suspicion.
State v. Flood 301 So. 2d 637 La. 1974
State v. Paciera 290 So. 2d 681 La. 1974
State v. Linkletter 286 So. 2d 321 La. 1973
(1969), this Court reversed a defendant's conviction where evidence seized pursuant to a warrant was used against the defendant at trial.
State v. Smith 283 So. 2d 470 La. 1973
404 U.S. 874 , 92 S. Ct. 26 , 30 L.Ed.2d 120 (1971) , (1969) as authority for the proposition that police may not, with knowledge of the existence and identification of a vehicle, delay securing a warrant until after the suspect has been removed and interrogated.
State v. Cooley 257 So. 2d 400 La. 1972
151 , 15 L.Ed.2d 30 , , , for the proposition that the seized evidence was inadmissible because the seizures were illegal.
State v. Allums 239 So. 2d 166 La. 1970
also dissent in State v. Lampkin, 253 La.
State v. Bazzell 230 So. 2d 586 La. 1970
State v. Holmes 225 So. 2d 1 La. 1969
we held that this article “leaves no doubt but that a search warrant can legally issue in this state only when an affidavit has been submitted to the judge and such affidavit recites facts which satisfy him, the judge, not the affiant, that probable cause exists for its issuance,” pointing out, “if we