Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Ghoram, 290 So. 2d 850.

19 citing documents.

State v. Small 78 So. 3d 825 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Tarleton 545 So. 2d 1195 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Walters 514 So. 2d 257 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
State v. Stringer 496 So. 2d 1287 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
is dispositive of this issue which holds that: "...
State v. Goza 408 So. 2d 1349 La. 1982
[1] , appeal after remand
State v. Talbot 408 So. 2d 861 La. 1981
State v. Whitt 404 So. 2d 254 La. 1981
State v. Monroe 364 So. 2d 570 La. 1978
State v. Tassin 343 So. 2d 681 La. 1977
In alleged rebuttal, the state then introduced the testimony of a girl he worked with and whom he had dated, that the accused had smoked marijuana with her one time, that he had admitted a prior use of drugs, and that he had written her a suicide note, the contents of which she testified to from memory.
State v. Hatter 338 So. 2d 100 La. 1976
1973) by using evidence of extraneous crimes in rebuttal ( (La.
State v. Ghoram 328 So. 2d 91 La. 1976
State v. Luckett 327 So. 2d 365 La. 1976
State v. Banks 307 So. 2d 594 La. 1975
cited by the defendant is not applicable.
State v. Cummings 303 So. 2d 725 La. 1974
handed down, 1974, the procedural rules of Prieur were held applicable not only to the State’s evidence in chief but also to cross-examination and rebuttal evidence.
State v. Hicks 301 So. 2d 357 La. 1974
State v. Pearson 296 So. 2d 316 La. 1974
State v. Lewis 294 So. 2d 204 La. 1974
State Ex Rel. Wikberg v. Henderson 292 So. 2d 505 La. 1974
State v. Prather 290 So. 2d 840 La. 1974
and State v. Ghoram, La., .