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. Jones, 316 So. 2d 100.

45 citing documents.

  • State v. Shirley 10 So. 3d 224 La. 2009
    State v. Morrison, [ ]; State v. Goetz, [ ]; State v. Graham, [ ]
  • State v. Busby 893 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    We stated in McElroy, 553 So.2d at 458 n. 1: Should there be no predominant evidence of "careful adherence to strict procedures in administering intoxication tests," State v. Jones, [ ], or in the event that a defendant takes issue with the qualifications of a technician, the quality of the testing machine, or the maintenance of the equipment, and so forth, the court, in the interest of due process and fairness, may well be entitled to bar the evidence.
  • State of Louisiana v. Ben Busby La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    We stated in McElroy, 553 So.2d at 458 n. 1: Should there be no predominant evidence of “careful adherence to strict procedures in administering intoxication tests,” State v. Jones, [], or in the event that a defendant takes issue with the qualifications of a technician, the quality of the testing machine, or the maintenance of the equipment, and so forth, the court, in the interest of due process and fairness, may
  • State v. Barker 629 So. 2d 1119 La. 1993
    State v. McElroy, supra, 553 So.2d at 458
  • State v. Blake 575 So. 2d 906 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
  • State v. Honeyman 560 So. 2d 825 La. 1990
    We stated in McElroy, 553 So.2d at 458 n. 1: Should there be no predominant evidence of "careful adherence to strict procedures in administering intoxication tests," State v. Jones, [ (La.
  • State v. McElroy 553 So. 2d 456 La. 1989
    Nonetheless, the state contends that, (La.
  • McWhiney v. State, Department of Public Safety 514 So. 2d 1202 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
  • State v. Moore 507 So. 2d 17 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
  • State v. Rowell 505 So. 2d 978 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
    State v. Morrison, [ ] supra; State v. Goetz, [ ] supra; State v. Graham, [ ] supra; ” Therefore, according to the dictates of Tanner , the State had the burden of proving the admissibility of the blood analysis.
  • State v. St. Amant 504 So. 2d 1094 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1987
  • State v. Bailey 500 So. 2d 843 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • State v. Fairleigh 490 So. 2d 490 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
    State v. Morrison, supra ; State v. Goetz, supra ; State v. Graham, supra
  • State v. Taylor 483 So. 2d 250 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • State v. Franklin 461 So. 2d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
    [1] Defendant argues that the police officer's certification in effect at the time the intoxilyzer test was administered to the defendant (December 1982) must be placed into evidence in order to satisfy the constitutional *642
  • State v. Downer 460 So. 2d 1184 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
    1978), and numerous other cases.
  • State v. Tanner 457 So. 2d 1172 La. 1984
    State v. Morrison, supra ; State v. Goetz, supra ; State v. Graham, supra
  • State v. Humphrey 445 So. 2d 1155 La. 1984
  • Conley v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. 421 So. 2d 254 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1982
    The police officer in our case showed by copies of his certificate and recertifications that he was qualified to administer the PEI tests (and did not merely so testify, for a criminal prosecution).
  • State v. Green 418 So. 2d 609 La. 1982
  • State v. Krause 405 So. 2d 832 La. 1981
  • State v. Gregory 403 So. 2d 1225 La. 1981
  • State v. Morrison 392 So. 2d 1037 La. 1980
  • State v. Westbrook 385 So. 2d 13 La. 1980
    32:662 presumption of a defendant’s intoxication arising from chemical analysis, we hold that at trial the state must show that the individual who approved the relevant machine for use has been certified to perform maintenance by the Department of Health and Human Resources.
  • State v. Williams 375 So. 2d 931 La. 1979
    a virtually indisputable presumption," in fact, a "practically conclusive presumption of guilt," and have noted the "heavy reliance placed on the results obtained," (La.
  • State v. Goetz 374 So. 2d 1219 La. 1979
    This Court, held that, in a criminal prosecution, before the state may avail itself of a statutory presumption of a defendant's intoxication arising from a chemical analysis of his blood, La.R.S.
  • State v. Catanese 368 So. 2d 975 La. 1979
  • City of Baton Rouge v. Overton 367 So. 2d 305 La. 1979
    the Louisiana Health and Human Resources Administration, Division of Health, promulgated rules and regulations pertaining to the performance of these chemical tests.
  • State v. Graham 360 So. 2d 853 La. 1978
  • State v. Francis 345 So. 2d 1120 La. 1977
    See also: State v. Chevallier, 213 La.
  • State v. Perkins 334 So. 2d 232 La. 1976
    Conviction set aside, or the state to show cause to the contrary within 15 days from date.
  • McNeil v. State ex rel. Department of Public Safety 334 So. 2d 704 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1976
  • Davis v. State, Department of Public Safety-License Control & Drivers Improvement Division 335 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1976
  • Mullens v. Department of Public Safety, Driv. Lic. D. 327 So. 2d 492 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1976
  • State v. Batiste 327 So. 2d 420 La. 1976
  • City of Baton Rouge v. Mitchell 325 So. 2d 588 La. 1976
  • Quoyeser v. Department of Public Safety 325 So. 2d 327 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1975
  • State v. Holloway 317 So. 2d 620 La. 1975
    Verdict and sentence reversed and case remanded for new trial under State v. Jones, La., 1975, ; State v. Junell, La., and other holdings.
  • City of Baton Rouge v. Levy 317 So. 2d 620 La. 1975
    14:98 are reversed in view of our decision in State v. Jones, La., , handed down on June 25, 1975.
  • State v. Mayo 317 So. 2d 620 La. 1975
    Under State v. Jones, La., 1975, ; State v. Junell, La., ; State v. Bruins, La., .
  • State v. Stephens 319 So. 2d 330 La. 1975
    Writ granted: Treating this appeal a’s an application to our supervisory jurisdiction, Supreme Court Rule 1, Section 10 (1973), the conviction appealed from is annulled, and the matter remanded for a new trial
  • City of Lafayette v. Rizzuto 314 So. 2d 739 La. 1975
    The trial court should, however, note decisions handed down this day in City of Monroe v. Robinson, La., ; State v. Jones, La., ; State v. Karol, La., ; State v. McGuffey, La., ; State v. Bruins, La., .
  • State v. McGuffey 316 So. 2d 107 La. 1975
    Because we have found that the failure to physically produce the operator's certification or permit evidencing his qualifications and authority to administer the PEI test is error warranting the reversal of a conviction and sentence in State v. Jones, La., , decided this date, we are constrained to reach a conforming result in the instant case for the reasons fully set forth in the Jones opinion, and because, in the instant case, the evidence acceptable to relator in lieu of strict adherence to
  • State v. Karol 316 So. 2d 106 La. 1975
    In State v. Jones, La., , decided this date, we determined that the "method" promulgated by the state department of health which purports to prescribe the procedure for conducting the breath test for determining alcohol concentration in the blood even if judicially cognizable, does not satisfy the requirements set forth in La.R.S.
  • City of Monroe v. Robinson 316 So. 2d 119 La. 1975
    Nevertheless, it is not necessary for us to consider the impact of this error, in light of our holding in State v. Jones, La., , decided this date, that the best evidence rules and other enunciated weighty considerations require that the State physically produce the certification of the operator who administers the PEI test before admitting the test results into evidence.