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. McCray, 305 So. 2d 433.

19 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Nathan Glenn Pettit, Jr. La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
    the weight of the testimony is left to the jury.” (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Cody Keith Fontenot -Aka- Cody Fontenot La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
    Likewise, in Kennerson, 702 So.2d at 863, this court found an owner’s testimony is generally sufficient to prove value: -57, the court stated the following concerning evidence sufficient to prove value: In State v. McCray, La., (1974), we stated: “Unless it is shown the owner lacks knowledge of the value of a movable [furniture], his testimony as to value is generally admissible, with its weight being left to the jury.
  • State v. Fontenot 207 So. 3d 589 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    Likewise, in Kennerson, 702 So.2d at 863 , this court found an owner’s testimony is generally sufficient to prove value: -57 , the court stated the following concerning evidence sufficient to prove value: In State v. McCray, La., (1974), we stated: “Unless it is shown the owner lacks knowledge of the value of a movable [furniture], his testimony as to value is generally admissible, with its weight being left to the jury.
  • State v. Bailey 180 So. 3d 442 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
    State v. James, 36,493 (La.App.2d Cir.12/11/02), ; State v. Henry, 46,406 (La.App.2d Cir.8/10/11), ; State v. Johnson, 31,448 (La.App.2d Cir.3/31/99), , writ denied, 1999-1689 (La.11/12/99), , cert.
  • State v. Henry 73 So. 3d 958 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    State v. James, 36,493 (La.App.2d Cir.12/11/02), ; State v. Johnson, 31,488 (La.App.2d Cir.3/31/99), , writ denied, 99-1689 (La.l 1/12/99), , cert.
  • State v. Boyd 999 So. 2d 40 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
    In support of its argument, where the Supreme Court stated the following concerning evidence sufficient to prove value: In State v. McCray, La., (1974), we stated: "Unless it is shown the owner lacks knowledge of the value of a movable [furniture], his testimony as to value is generally admissible, with its weight being left to the jury.
  • State of Louisiana v. Gregory Johnson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
  • State v. Johnson 893 So. 2d 945 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
  • State v. Shepherd 839 So. 2d 1103 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
  • State v. Carthan 765 So. 2d 357 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
  • State v. Stack 710 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
  • State v. Chester 707 So. 2d 973 La. 1997
    Nevertheless, Lawrence's testimony provided jurors with direct evidence regarding the value of the tools, and jurors had more than simply the disproportionately small sale price with which to gauge defendant's subjective knowledge.
  • State v. Kennerson 702 So. 2d 867 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    However, he repeated, “But I still maintain that anything that runs is worth over five hundred dollars.” -1257 (La.1978), the court stated the following concerning evidence sufficient to prove value: In State v. McCray, La., (1974), the court stated: *870 “Unless it is shown the owner lacks knowledge of the value of a movable [furniture], his testimony as to value is generally admissible, with its weight being left to the jury.
  • State v. Kennerson 702 So. 2d 860 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
    -57 , the court stated the following concerning evidence sufficient to prove value: In State v. McCray, La., (1974), we stated: "Unless it is shown the owner lacks knowledge of the value of a movable [furniture], his testimony as to value is generally admissible, with its weight being left to the jury.
  • State v. Jordan 522 So. 2d 1179 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
    The Supreme Court reviewed admissibility of the evidence and stated: In State v. McCray, La., (1974), we stated: "Unless it is shown the owner lacks knowledge of the value of a movable [furniture], his testimony as to value is *1181 generally admissible, with its weight being left to the jury.
  • State v. Lambert 475 So. 2d 791 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
  • State v. Clark 475 So. 2d 789 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
  • State v. Dilworth 358 So. 2d 1254 La. 1978
    In State v. McCray, La., (1974), we stated: "Unless it is shown the owner lacks knowledge of the value of a movable [furniture], his testimony as to value is generally admissible, with its weight being *1257 left to the jury.
  • State v. Curtis 319 So. 2d 434 La. 1975
    we held that absent a showing that the owner lacks knowledge of the value of a movable, his testimony regarding its value is generally admissible; the weight to be accorded such testimony becomes an issue for jury resolution.