Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Prieur, 277 So. 2d 126.

864 citing documents.

State v. McCasland 218 So. 3d 1119 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State v. Jones 214 So. 3d 124 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State of Louisiana v. Leo Paul Thibodeaux, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
6 Notice of Prieur Hearing In his first assignment of error, modified by State v. Taylor, 16-1124, 16-1183 (La.
State v. Thibodeaux 216 So. 3d 73 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
| ^Notice of Prieur Hearing In his first assignment of error, (La.
State v. Young 216 So. 3d 236 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
State v. Breedlove 213 So. 3d 1195 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
State v. Ross 207 So. 3d 511 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Walker 206 So. 3d 474 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Joseph 208 So. 3d 1036 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Copelin 206 So. 3d 990 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Joseph Taylor 217 So. 3d 283 La. 2016
In accordance with Louisiana Code of Evidence article 404(B)(1) (La.
State of Louisiana v. William Chester Farry Jr. AKA William Chester Farry AKA William C. Farry AKA William … La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
State v. Farry 206 So. 3d 1222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
3031 , 120 L.Ed.2d 901 (1992) ” In this case, the trial court found the evidence constituted res gestae; thus, according to Arvie , the Defendant was not entitled to notice.
State v. Murphy 206 So. 3d 219 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Marcus Donte Reed 200 So. 3d 291 La. 2016
State v. Falgout 198 So. 3d 1232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Hill 194 So. 3d 1262 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Simmons 190 So. 3d 1274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
First, the State must provide written notice to the defendant of the acts it intends to prove, along with the exception to the exclusionary rule upon which it relies.
State v. Hayes 206 So. 3d 875 La. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Robert Glen Coleman 188 So. 3d 174 La. 2016
However, such evidence is admissible if the state establishes an independent relevant reason, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake 14 (La.
State v. Small 189 So. 3d 1129 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
State v. Jones 188 So. 3d 268 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
State v. Robertson 183 So. 3d 1287 La. 2016
State v. Hamilton 209 So. 3d 750 La. 2016
State v. Fair 182 So. 3d 1238 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Wallace 185 So. 3d 795 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Rumley 183 So. 3d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
The defendant is correct that evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts committed by a defendant is inadmissible because of the “substantial risk of grave prejudice to the defendant.” State v. Rose, 2006-0402, p. 12 (La.2/22/07), ().
State v. Johnson 182 So. 3d 378 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Scott 184 So. 3d 2 La. 2015
Defendant argued this evidence is inadmissible because it is not relevant to the charged offenses, it is unfairly prejudicial, it does not constitute res gestae, it pertains to allegations that.are unsubstantiated, and the state failed |2
State v. Gray 179 So. 3d 936 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 1/24/01), , To be admissible, at least one of the purposes allowed by La.
State v. Bell 178 So. 3d 234 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Hunter 176 So. 3d 530 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
art. 404 B(1); State v. Lawrence, 09-1637, p. 7 (La.App.
State v. Butler 171 So. 3d 1283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
However, in a separate trial on the joined offense, does not per se prevent the joinder and single trial of both crimes, if the joinder is otherwise permissible.
State v. Carter 171 So. 3d 1265 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Cox 174 So. 3d 131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
art. 404(B)(1); (limiting introduction of other crimes evidence).
State v. Daniel 182 So. 3d 21 La. 2015
State v. Waterhouse 171 So. 3d 1113 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Lee, supra; (“The State shall within a reasonable time before trial furnish in writing to the defendant a statement of the acts or offenses it intends to offer, describing same with the general particularity required |4of an indictment or information.”).
State v. Woodberry 171 So. 3d 1082 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
“Generally, evidence of other crimes committed by the defendant is inadmissible due to the substantial risk of grave prejudice to the defendant.” ().
State v. Thomas 171 So. 3d 959 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Taylor 165 So. 3d 1115 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
art. 404(B)(1); State v. Williams, 96-1023, p. 30 (La.1/21/98)
State v. Rapp 161 So. 3d 103 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
art. 404 B(l), in accordance *106 with State, v. Prieur
State v. Robinson 167 So. 3d 793 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
On November 26, 2013, the State filed a “Notice of Intent to Use Evidence of Other Crimes Evidence,” seeking to introduce evidence at trial of defendant’s 2007 conviction for distribution of cocaine within 1,000 feet of a posted drug-free *797 zone, in violation of La.
State v. Reaux 165 So. 3d 944 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Hardy 154 So. 3d 537 La. 2014
State v. Galliano, 2002-2849, p. 2 (La.1/10/03), , per curiam
State v. Greenberry 154 So. 3d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Generally, evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts committed by the defendant is inadmissible due to the “substantial risk of grave prejudice to the defendant.”
State of Louisiana v. William Felix Vail La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
State v. Stevens, 11-175 (La.App.
State v. Vail 150 So. 3d 576 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Stevens, 11-175 (La.App.
State v. Castillo 167 So. 3d 624 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Frith 151 So. 3d 946 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Jones v. Cain 151 So. 3d 781 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014