Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Dillon, 255 So. 2d 745.

26 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Kevin Rickmon La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
State v. Hobbs 494 So. 2d 1246 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
State v. Kendig 451 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
(1971), the Louisiana Supreme Court held: "...
State v. Defraites 449 So. 2d 540 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
2871 , 61 L.Ed.2d 305 ; , (1971).
State v. Atkins 360 So. 2d 1341 La. 1978
State v. Hodges 349 So. 2d 250 La. 1977
(1971); State v. Jones, 257 La.
State v. West 319 So. 2d 901 La. 1975
State v. Jackson, La., (1975); , (1971); State v. Richard, 245 La.
State v. Jackson 308 So. 2d 265 La. 1975
State v. McGloster 303 So. 2d 739 La. 1974
State v. Morrison 302 So. 2d 286 La. 1974
471 , (1971); , (1971); State v. McQueen, 257 La.
State v. Adams 296 So. 2d 278 La. 1974
State v. Ferdinand 285 So. 2d 530 La. 1973
State v. Vassel 285 So. 2d 221 La. 1973
State v. Howard 283 So. 2d 199 La. 1973
State v. Neal 275 So. 2d 765 La. 1973
State v. Williams 273 So. 2d 280 La. 1973
State v. McLeod 271 So. 2d 45 La. 1973
State v. Warren 271 So. 2d 527 La. 1973
521 , (1969); , (1971); State v. Davis, 259 La.
State v. Harris 269 So. 2d 830 La. 1972
(1971) and cases cited therein.
State v. Bell 268 So. 2d 610 La. 1972
The trial court here properly exercised its discretion, and its ruling was correct.” See, , ; State v. Shaffer, 260 La.
State v. Tauceda 268 So. 2d 214 La. 1972
State v. Dobard 263 So. 2d 16 La. 1972
Explaining the requirements of the-opening state- *231 merit, , (1971), “However, by its opening statement, the State is only required to explain ‘the nature of the charge, and [to] set forth, in general terms, the nahire of the evidence by which the state expects to prove the charge.’ La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Whitsell 262 So. 2d 509 La. 1972
State v. Isaac 260 So. 2d 302 La. 1972
(1971) and the authorities therein cited.
State v. Nelson 259 So. 2d 46 La. 1972
(1971); State v. Wright, 254 La.
State v. Himel 257 So. 2d 670 La. 1972
In the most recent case of State v. Dillon, decided December 13, 1971, , , we held the “opening statement is designed only to afford the jury a general acquaintance with the case to enable it to understand the testimony to be introduced”.