DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Cryer, 263 So. 2d 895.

35 citing documents.

  • State v. Monroe 198 So. 3d 259 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Mitchell , 2000-1399, p. 5, 779 So.2d at 702 ( , (1972)).
  • State v. Simms 143 So. 3d 1258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Mitch *1272 ell, 2000-1399, p. 5, 779 So.2d at 702 ( , (1972)).
  • State of Louisiana v. Paxton Jules Trahan La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    Also “[s]tatements in argument to the effect that there is no refuting evidence does not constitute an impermissible reference to the defendant’s failure to testify.” ( So.2d 895 (1972)).
  • State v. Trahan 61 So. 3d 794 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Also “[statements in argument to the effect that there is no refuting evidence does not constitute an impermissible reference to the defendant’s failure to testify.” ( , (1972)).
  • State of Louisiana v. Jonathan Edward Boyer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    Also “[s]tatements in argument to the effect that there is no refuting evidence does not constitute an impermissible reference to the defendant’s failure to testify.” ( So.2d 895 (1972)).
  • State v. Boyer 56 So. 3d 1119 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Also “Statements in argument to the effect that there is no refuting evidence does not constitute an impermissible reference to the defendant’s failure to testify.” ( , (1972)).
  • State of Louisiana v. Kendall Paul Davis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Also “[s]tatements in argument to the effect that there is no refuting evidence does not constitute an impermissible reference to the defendant’s failure to testify.” ( So.2d 895 (1972)).
  • State v. Davis 36 So. 3d 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Also “[sjtatements in argument to the effect that there is no refuting evidence does not constitute an impermissible reference to the defendant’s failure to testify.” ( , (1972)).
  • State v. Mitchell 779 So. 2d 698 La. 2001
  • State v. Denomes 674 So. 2d 465 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • State v. Baxley 656 So. 2d 973 La. 1995
    (1972), we held that a defendant did not have standing to challenge the constitutionality of a $15,000.00 fine to which he claimed to be subject.
  • State v. Jones 639 So. 2d 1144 La. 1994
    1978); , (1972); Tafaro's Investment Co. v. Division of Housing Improvement, 261 La.
  • State v. Bowman 491 So. 2d 1380 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
  • State v. Jackson 454 So. 2d 116 La. 1984
  • State v. Gabriel 450 So. 2d 611 La. 1984
    State v. Foret , (1972); State v. Nails, 255 La.
  • Diaz v. Allstate Ins. Co. 433 So. 2d 699 La. 1983
    557 , (1972); , (1972); Tafaro's Investment Co. v. Division of Housing Improvement, 261 La.
  • State v. Perkins 374 So. 2d 1234 La. 1979
    References made in closing argument that the State's case stands unrebutted or uncontroverted have frequently been upheld by this court, , (1972).
  • State v. Collins 370 So. 2d 533 La. 1979
    695 , (1972); , (1972); State v. Bowie, 221 La.
  • State v. Williams 362 So. 2d 530 La. 1978
    (1972); State v. Lawrence, 260 La.
  • State v. Henderson 352 So. 2d 206 La. 1977
  • State Ex Rel. Clark v. Marullo 352 So. 2d 223 La. 1977
  • State v. Sims 346 So. 2d 664 La. 1977
    (1972); State v. Burch, 261 La.
  • State v. Smith 327 So. 2d 355 La. 1976
    (1972), in which we held that it was not a comment on the defendants' failure to testify where, during closing argument, the district attorney pointed to defendants and asked: "Does anybody deny that these two people and Falcon were present that night in the Wooddale apartment?
  • State v. Brown 326 So. 2d 839 La. 1976
    (1972); State v. Melerine, 236 La.
  • State v. Carter 326 So. 2d 848 La. 1975
    (1972), involved the admissibility of testimony by an officer that one jointly charged but not on trial told the officer he obtained the contraband from the defendants.
  • State v. Foret 315 So. 2d 278 La. 1975
    (1972); State v. Nails, 255 La.
  • State v. Hall 297 So. 2d 413 La. 1974
    (1972); State v. Wright, 251 La.
  • State v. Paciera 290 So. 2d 681 La. 1974
    695 , (1972); , (1972); State v. Bowie, 221 La.
  • State v. Ackal 290 So. 2d 882 La. 1974
    773; , (1972); State v. Shaffer, 260 La.
  • State v. Reed 284 So. 2d 574 La. 1973
  • State v. Womack 283 So. 2d 708 La. 1973
    Art. 703; , (1972); State v. Royal, 255 La.
  • State v. Frazier 283 So. 2d 261 La. 1973
    State v. *265 Cryer, , (1972).
  • State v. Beach 279 So. 2d 657 La. 1973
    (1972) and the cases cited therein.
  • State v. Foy 278 So. 2d 38 La. 1973
    (1972); State v. Jones, 230 La.
  • State v. Finley 275 So. 2d 762 La. 1973
    art. 703, , (1972) and the cases cited therein, we have considered the substance of the defendant's allegations and found them to be without merit.