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. Ghoram, 328 So. 2d 91.

26 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. William Felix Vail La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
    -44 (La.1980); -94 (La.1976).
  • State v. Vail 236 So. 3d 644 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    State v. Hills , , 743-44 (La.1980) ; see also State v. Pearson , , 835 (La.1976) ; State v. Ghoram , , 93-94 (La.
  • State v. Vallo 117 So. 3d 268 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
  • State of Louisiana v. Jonathan Edward Boyer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    -44 (La.1980); -94 (La.1976).
  • State v. Boyer 56 So. 3d 1119 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    -44 (La.1980); -94 (La.1976).
  • State v. Kennedy 957 So. 2d 757 La. 2007
  • State v. Ball 824 So. 2d 1089 La. 2002
  • State v. Trosclair 691 So. 2d 202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    While not exactly on point, cert.
  • State v. Armstrong 683 So. 2d 1261 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • State v. Sneed 571 So. 2d 735 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
  • State v. Magouirk 539 So. 2d 50 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
  • State v. Mayeux 526 So. 2d 1243 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
    A witness who exercised his Fifth Amendment privilege at the second trial and refused to testify was declared "unavailable" and his testimony at the first trial was held properly admissible.
  • State v. In the Interest of R.C. 494 So. 2d 1350 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • State v. RC 494 So. 2d 1350 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
  • State v. Dean 487 So. 2d 709 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
    The general rule is that the prosecution within a reasonable time before trial must furnish in writing to the defendant a statement of other acts or offenses if it intends to offer into evidence specifying the exception to the general exclusionary rule upon which it relies for their admissibility, , (La.1982)
  • State v. Johnson 461 So. 2d 1273 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Nall 439 So. 2d 420 La. 1983
    1976); where the witness is physically or mentally ill, if the witness is absent and cannot with due diligence be found, if the witness persistently refuses to testify, or if the witness refuses to testify on the ground of recognized privilege
  • State v. Oliver 430 So. 2d 650 La. 1983
    this court held that a witness who refused to testify and was found to be in contempt of court for such refusal was "unavailable" and that his prior recorded testimony was admissible at the second trial.
  • State v. Goza 408 So. 2d 1349 La. 1982
    [1] , appeal after remand
  • State v. Knowles 395 So. 2d 678 La. 1981
  • State v. Egena 369 So. 2d 1295 La. 1979
    While the article does not refer to the transcript of a witness' testimony at a former trial, that the transcript of a witness at a first trial could be introduced in his stead at a second one upon a proper showing that the prosecutorial authorities had made a good faith effort to obtain his presence at trial.
  • State v. Collum 365 So. 2d 1272 La. 1979
  • State ex rel. Joiner 365 So. 2d 1152 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1978
  • State v. Turner 352 So. 2d 1007 La. 1977
    State v. Bell, La., (1977); State v. Sylvester, La., (1977); State v. Ford, La., (1976); State v. Ghoram, La., (1976).
  • State v. Sylvester 343 So. 2d 1020 La. 1977
    They cite Article 295 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which allows the admission under certain circumstances of a witness' testimony recorded at a preliminary hearing, [4] and they rely on our decisions in State *1022 v. Pearson, which allow the introduction in certain circumstances at defendant's second trial of the testimony recorded at his first trial.
  • State v. Pearson 336 So. 2d 833 La. 1976