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. Migliore, 260 So. 2d 682.

32 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Derrick Cardet Withers La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
    So.2d 682 (1972), that where there is a sufficient amount of the evidence, the defendant should be permitted to conduct an independent examination.
  • State v. Ferguson 54 So. 3d 152 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Frazier 870 So. 2d 1075 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
  • State v. White 535 So. 2d 929 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
  • State v. Williams 471 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    The trial court had ordered the State to make available the substance to defendant, , (1972), which hold that where the crime charged is possession or sale of a prohibited substance, a defendant may have a small amount of the drug for independent, pretrial inspection where a sufficient amount of the evidence exists.
  • State v. Lingle 461 So. 2d 1046 La. 1985
  • State v. Boyd 359 So. 2d 931 La. 1978
    (1972), this court held that "because of the sufficient amount of the [narcotics] evidence," the defendant should have been allowed to make an independent examination of the evidence.
  • State v. Yates 350 So. 2d 1169 La. 1977
    425 , (1969); or some of the confiscated narcotic evidence in a narcotic prosecution, , (1970).
  • State v. Hopkins 351 So. 2d 474 La. 1977
  • State v. Thornton 351 So. 2d 480 La. 1977
    Furthermore, it has been held that the defense is not entitled to pretrial discovery of names of State witnesses, descriptions of physical evidence, witness statements, photographs, or physical objects (except in the case of narcotics evidence, , (1972)).
  • State v. Hodges 349 So. 2d 250 La. 1977
    425 , (1969); or some of the confiscated narcotic evidence in a narcotic prosecution, , (1970).
  • State v. Jones 345 So. 2d 1161 La. 1977
    Later, however when defense counsel narrowed the request to ascertain the location of the heroin held by the prosecutor to “look at it,” the prosecutor said, “Well, file your motions, file your Migliore motions.” , (1972).
  • State v. Tyler 342 So. 2d 574 La. 1977
    425 , (1969); or some of the confiscated narcotic evidence in a narcotic prosecution, , (1970).
  • State v. Brumfield 329 So. 2d 181 La. 1976
    425 , (1969); or some of the confiscated narcotic evidence in a narcotic prosecution, , (1970).
  • State v. Ball 328 So. 2d 81 La. 1976
    425 , (1969); or some of the confiscated narcotic evidence in a narcotic prosecution, *83 , (1970).
  • State v. Howard 325 So. 2d 812 La. 1976
  • State v. White 321 So. 2d 491 La. 1975
    425 , (1969); or some of the confiscated narcotic evidence in a narcotic prosecution, , (1970).
  • State v. Humphreys 319 So. 2d 344 La. 1975
  • State v. Nero 319 So. 2d 303 La. 1975
  • State v. Darbonne 319 So. 2d 431 La. 1975
  • State v. Swendsen 316 So. 2d 394 La. 1975
    I concur in this dismissal of the action in order to inform the State, defense counsel, , (1972) when it granted the writ in the instant case.
  • State v. Collins 308 So. 2d 263 La. 1975
    425 , (1969); or some of the confiscated narcotic evidence in a narcotic prosecution, , (1970).
  • State v. Flood 301 So. 2d 637 La. 1974
    Bill of Exceptions No. 10 (Specification of Error No. 4) deals with the question of whether the defense was denied full access to the physical evidence for the purpose of an independent examination for arsenic, contrary to the order of this Court issued March 1, 1973, , (1972).
  • State v. Barnard 287 So. 2d 770 La. 1973
  • State v. Baker 288 So. 2d 52 La. 1973
    425 , (1969); and, in some instances, narcotics, a portion of the drug upon which the prosecution depends, , (1972), pretrial discovery of the State's evidence has not been allowed.
  • State v. Bourne 283 So. 2d 233 La. 1973
    We have, of course, , (1972), that a defendant is entitled to have an independent examination of state narcotic evidence.
  • State v. Glass 283 So. 2d 696 La. 1973
    At the time that defendant's motion was denied, the *697 , (1972).
  • State v. Bendo 281 So. 2d 106 La. 1973
    (1972); State v. Hall, 253 La.
  • State v. Frezal 278 So. 2d 64 La. 1973
    (1972) permitted a pre-trial independent examination of certain drugs involved in that litigation under the guidelines to be set by the trial judge.
  • State v. Edgecombe 275 So. 2d 740 La. 1973
    Initially, , , is not apposite to the instant matter.
  • State v. St. Amand 274 So. 2d 179 La. 1973
    (1972); State v. Hall, 253 La.
  • State v. Jones 267 So. 2d 559 La. 1972
    This case does not involve, , (1972), the possession of a substance which is.