DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Linkletter, 286 So. 2d 321.

23 citing documents.

  • State v. Warren 700 So. 2d 1297 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
    See, where the court stated that “defendants are not required to ferret out of this 70-odd page transcript the simple answer to their questions.” Considering only the bill of information, with its meager details quoted above, and the statutory description of the crime (see footnote 1 above), we agree that t
  • State v. Westfall 446 So. 2d 1292 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Tesch 431 So. 2d 108 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    ” 290 So.2d at 685, 686 .
  • State v. Roubique 421 So. 2d 859 La. 1982
  • State v. Edwards 406 So. 2d 1331 La. 1981
  • State v. Ragsdale 381 So. 2d 492 La. 1980
  • State v. Daniel 373 So. 2d 149 La. 1979
    Summers, J., dissenting; State v. Holmes, 254 La.
  • State v. Rudolph 369 So. 2d 1320 La. 1979
    ( State v. Paciera, 290 So.2d at 685-686 ) (La.
  • State v. Weinberg 364 So. 2d 964 La. 1978
  • State v. Richards 357 So. 2d 1128 La. 1978
  • State v. Anderson 357 So. 2d 547 La. 1978
  • State v. Angel 356 So. 2d 986 La. 1978
  • State v. Gilbert 354 So. 2d 508 La. 1978
  • State v. Stripling 354 So. 2d 1297 La. 1978
  • State v. Joseph 351 So. 2d 1162 La. 1977
  • State v. Smith 350 So. 2d 1178 La. 1977
  • State v. Barrett 350 So. 2d 664 La. 1977
    1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964); State v. Wells, 253 La.
  • State v. Brawley 347 So. 2d 238 La. 1977
  • State v. Linkletter 345 So. 2d 452 La. 1977
  • State v. Rittiner 341 So. 2d 307 La. 1977
  • Distinguished State v. Roach 322 So. 2d 222 La. 1975
    [4] where the informant's belief was unsupported by factual statement.
  • State v. Paciera 290 So. 2d 681 La. 1974
  • State v. Linkletter 286 So. 2d 330 La. 1973
    The Court held, in State v. Linkletter, Linkletter, and Morris, (No. 53,571 on our docket this day), that defendants charged with simple burglary by short form .information were entitled to have the information quashed, since it did not sufficiently inform them of the nature and cause of the offense with which they *331 were charged, where the State refused to supply the informati