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, 332 So. 2d 461.

36 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Colby James Kinsey A/K/A Colby J. Kinsey La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
    2/10/12), ( ) the supreme court noted that during a habitual offender proceeding, a trial judge may take judicial notice “of any prior proceeding which was a part of the same case he had previously tried.” In State v. McGill, 52,169, pp. 5-6 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Bishop Slade Dubroc La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
    2/10/12), () the supreme court noted that during a habitual offender proceeding, a trial judge may take judicial notice “of any prior proceeding which was a part of the same case he had previously tried.” Although the trial court in the present case did not specifically state it was taking judicial notic
  • State of Louisiana v. Bishop Slade Dubroc La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
    2/10/12), () the supreme court noted that during a habitual offender proceeding, a trial judge may take judicial notice “of any prior proceeding which was a part of the same case he had previously tried.” Although the trial court in the present case did not specifically state it was taking judicial notic
  • State v. Dubroc 261 So. 3d 813 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    2/10/12), , 1234 (quoting State v. Jones , , 462 (La.1976) ) the supreme court noted that during a habitual offender proceeding, a trial judge may take judicial notice "of any prior proceeding which was a part of the same case he had previously tried."
  • State v. Dubroc 261 So. 3d 832 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    2/10/12), , 1234 (quoting State v. Jones , , 462 (La.1976) ) the supreme court noted that during a habitual offender proceeding, a trial judge may take judicial notice "of any prior proceeding which was a part of the same case he had previously tried."
  • State v. McGill 253 So. 3d 872 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
    State v. Brown , supra , citing State v. Jones , (La.
  • State v. Roland 162 So. 3d 558 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
  • State of Louisiana v. Kenneth Wayne Montgomery La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
  • State v. Baskin 129 So. 3d 614 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    State v. Brown, 11-1656 (La.2/10/12), ; (A trial judge may take judicial notice during habitual offender proceedings “of any prior proceeding which was a part of the same case he had previously tried.”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
  • State v. Brown 82 So. 3d 1232 La. 2012
    (A trial judge may take judicial notice during habitual offender proceedings “of any prior proceeding which was a part of the same case he had previously tried.”)(internal quotation marks and citation omitted); n. 2 (La.App.
  • State v. Turner 32 So. 3d 277 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    2d Cir.2/24/99), , writ denied, 99-1010 (La.9/3/99)
  • State v. Timmons 22 So. 3d 1074 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
  • State v. Muhammad 875 So. 2d 45 La. 2004
  • State v. Bush 733 So. 2d 49 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
    *56 (La.1976); State v. O'Day, 191 La.
  • State v. Jackson 726 So. 2d 1061 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
  • State v. Boykin 688 So. 2d 1250 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
  • State v. Spencer 683 So. 2d 1326 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
  • State v. Soileau 677 So. 2d 518 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
    wherein the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: Our decision in State v. O'Day, 191 La.
  • State v. Gordon 582 So. 2d 285 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    (In an habitual offender hearing, the trial court could take judicial notice of any prior proceeding which was a part of the same case he had previously tried.)
  • State v. Magouirk 561 So. 2d 801 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
  • State v. Richardson 459 So. 2d 31 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Martin 400 So. 2d 1063 La. 1981
  • State v. Valentine 397 So. 2d 1299 La. 1981
  • State v. Lozier 375 So. 2d 1333 La. 1979
    that the sentence enhancement proceeding is deemed to be part of the original prosecution and the trial judge "`had the right to take judicial cognizance of any prior proceeding which was a part of the same case he had previously tried.'" State v. O'Day, 191 La.
  • State v. Augillard 371 So. 2d 798 La. 1979
    However, the decisions cited ( and State v. O'Day, 191 La.
  • State v. Muse 367 So. 2d 789 La. 1979
    we stated that the statute is not the exclusive method of proving that defendant is a habitual offender
  • State v. Bernard 366 So. 2d 1294 La. 1978
    See also, State v. Maduell, supra.
  • State v. Lee 364 So. 2d 1024 La. 1978
  • State v. Western 355 So. 2d 1314 La. 1978
    State v. Taylor, La., (1977); State v. Haynes, La., (1976); State v. Jones, La., (1976).
  • State v. Hamilton 356 So. 2d 1360 La. 1978
  • State v. Adams 355 So. 2d 917 La. 1978
  • State v. Barrow 352 So. 2d 635 La. 1977
  • State v. Gardette 352 So. 2d 212 La. 1977
    State v. Taylor, La., (1977); State v. Haynes, La., (1976); State v. Jones, La., (1976).
  • State v. Lawrence 351 So. 2d 493 La. 1977
  • State v. Gray 351 So. 2d 448 La. 1977
  • State v. Taylor 347 So. 2d 172 La. 1977
    See State v. Haynes, La., (1976); State v. Jones, La., (1976); State v. Brown, La., (1975).