Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Smith, 332 So. 2d 773.

17 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Danny Ray Sherman La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
” in which the supreme court stated, “[a]s a general rule, an appellate court may review the testimony at trial in determining the correctness of the trial court’s pre-trial ruling on a motion to suppress.
State v. Sherman 896 So. 2d 1194 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
State v. Martin 595 So. 2d 592 La. 1992
State v. Shelton 545 So. 2d 1285 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Costillo 448 So. 2d 238 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Ohrberg 448 So. 2d 1316 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
United States v. Bland, 653 F.2d 989 (1981), U.S. cert.
State v. Warner 444 So. 2d 284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
Dunaway v. Rester Refrigeration Service, Inc. 428 So. 2d 1064 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
State v. Sumler 395 So. 2d 766 La. 1981
[2] (Dixon, Calogero and Dennis, JJ.
State v. Hicks 376 So. 2d 118 La. 1979
State v. Sullivan 352 So. 2d 649 La. 1977
State v. Tennant 352 So. 2d 629 La. 1977
State v. Francis 345 So. 2d 1120 La. 1977
State v. Smith, La., (1976); State v. Butler, La., (1976); State v. Kaufman, La., (1976).
State v. Lewis 343 So. 2d 1056 La. 1977
State v. Smith, La., (1976); State v. Butler, La., (1976); State v. Kaufman, La., (1976).
State v. Clark 340 So. 2d 1302 La. 1976
State v. Smith, La., (1976); State v. Butler, La., (1976); State v. Kaufman, La., (1976).
State v. Smith 339 So. 2d 829 La. 1976
This argument was considered at length and narrowly rejected by a (La.
State v. Clift 339 So. 2d 755 La. 1976