Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Snedecor, 294 So. 2d 207.

37 citing documents.

State v. Norah 131 So. 3d 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Pierre 111 So. 3d 64 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
494 , 169 L.Ed.2d 346 (2007)
State v. Ingram 71 So. 3d 437 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Blank 955 So. 2d 90 La. 2007
1983); (rejecting the defendant's claim that the court should have excluded his inculpatory statement in its entirety because it contained other crimes references and the statement had been made following the administration of a polygraph examination because he could h
State of Louisiana v. Paul Roberts, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
We have said: Furthermore, the supreme court has held that a “transcript of a tape [is] admissible over a best evidence objection, since the transcript provide[s] the jury with a convenience in following the playback of the 36 tape.” ().
State v. Roberts 947 So. 2d 208 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. Elbertine Demery Sykes La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Furthermore, the supreme court has held that a “transcript of a tape [is] admissible over a best evidence objection, since the transcript provide[s] the jury with a convenience in following the playback of the tape.” (
State v. Sykes 857 So. 2d 638 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
State v. Billiot 672 So. 2d 361 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Howard 626 So. 2d 459 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
held that a transcript of a tape was admissible over a best evidence objection, since the transcript provided the jury with a convenience in following the playback of the tape.
State v. Martin 607 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Lyons 597 So. 2d 593 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
State v. Mills 505 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
State v. Barbre 499 So. 2d 1324 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
State v. Thomas 470 So. 2d 413 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
State v. Vinet 466 So. 2d 544 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
7 Wigmore on Evidence Sections 2100, 2115 (3rd Ed.1940).
State v. Sutton 460 So. 2d 1087 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
unless the "other crimes” are interrelated with the crime for which the defendant is on trial.
State v. Joseph 454 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
7 Wigmore on Evidence §§ 2100, 2115 (3rd Ed. 1940).
State v. Celestine 443 So. 2d 1091 La. 1983
State v. Green 443 So. 2d 531 La. 1983
State v. Burdgess 434 So. 2d 1062 La. 1983
State v. Morris 429 So. 2d 111 La. 1983
7 Wigmore on Evidence §§ 2100, 2115 (3rd Ed.1940).
State v. Perry 420 So. 2d 139 La. 1982
827 , 42 L.Ed.2d 838 (1974)
State v. Legro 410 So. 2d 1063 La. 1982
2 See State *1065 v. Snedecor, State v. Eubanks, 232 La.
State v. Wilson 404 So. 2d 968 La. 1981
State v. Hennigan 404 So. 2d 222 La. 1981
State v. Sonnier 379 So. 2d 1336 La. 1980
State v. Martin 376 So. 2d 300 La. 1979
State v. Williams 366 So. 2d 1365 La. 1978
In State v. Mullins, La., (1977), we rejected the identical argument, stating: " (La.
State v. Atkins 360 So. 2d 1341 La. 1978
this Court considered a defendant's contention that the prosecutor, in his opening statement, had violated the mandate of Article 767.
State v. Mullins 353 So. 2d 243 La. 1977
: Pretermitting the inconsistency of defendant's position, (1974) that `a party defendant is entitled to insist upon introduction of the entirety of a statement sought to be used against him, although of course he may waive the benefits of the protective stat
State v. Whitmore 353 So. 2d 1286 La. 1977
766-769 and Official Comments; State v. Snedecor, La., (1974); State v. Cannon, 184 La.
State v. Moore 344 So. 2d 973 La. 1977
15:450 the trial judge should have deleted that portion of the confession that made reference to other offenses and only permitted the introduction of that portion of the confession dealing with the murder of Vicki Nassar.
State v. Roche 341 So. 2d 348 La. 1976
We held in State v. Snedecor, La., (1974), that introducing transcripts, for the jury's convenience, with the tape recordings does not violate the best evidence rule.
State v. Shepherd 332 So. 2d 228 La. 1976
State v. Link 301 So. 2d 339 La. 1974
Regarding allusions to unrelated crimes contained in a taped confession, this Court recently stated in State v. Snedecor, La., (1974): "[W]e (1974) that `a party defendant is entitled to insist upon introduction of the entirety of a statement sought to be used against him, although of course he may waive the benefits of the protective statute.'
State v. McKinney 302 So. 2d 917 La. 1974