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. Gilmore, 332 So. 2d 789.

87 citing documents.

  • State v. Talbot 408 So. 2d 861 La. 1981
    State v. Williams, 258 La.
  • State v. Edwards 406 So. 2d 1331 La. 1981
  • State v. Washington 407 So. 2d 1138 La. 1981
  • State v. Washington 407 So. 2d 1138 La. 1981
    It would appear the first requirement was satisfied in this case.
  • State v. Storms 406 So. 2d 135 La. 1981
  • State v. Lindsey 404 So. 2d 466 La. 1981
  • State v. Smith 400 So. 2d 587 La. 1981
  • State v. Bryan 398 So. 2d 1019 La. 1981
  • State v. Goodley 398 So. 2d 1068 La. 1981
    The meaning of these provisions [3] in a somewhat similar situation.
  • State v. Spell 399 So. 2d 551 La. 1981
  • State v. Anderson 390 So. 2d 878 La. 1980
  • State v. Gibson 391 So. 2d 421 La. 1980
    (3) deny defendant's motion for a new trial in a jury trial or for a judgment of acquittal, La.C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Stewart 389 So. 2d 1321 La. 1980
  • State v. Landry 388 So. 2d 699 La. 1980
  • State v. Davis 385 So. 2d 193 La. 1980
  • State v. Vernon 385 So. 2d 200 La. 1980
  • State v. Molinario 383 So. 2d 345 La. 1980
  • State v. Prejean 379 So. 2d 240 La. 1980
    we discussed *245 the proposition that where a defendant stipulated to all the facts to which allegedly gruesome photographs would be relevant, the trial court would act properly in excluding the photographs from evidence.
  • State v. Manieri 378 So. 2d 931 La. 1979
  • State v. Sterling 377 So. 2d 58 La. 1979
  • Distinguished State v. Liner 373 So. 2d 121 La. 1979
  • State v. Lawrence 365 So. 2d 1356 La. 1978
    See State v. Gilmore, La., (1976) and the authorities cited.
  • State v. Wilson 363 So. 2d 481 La. 1978
    State v. Gilmore, La., (1976); State v. Edwards, La., (1973); State v. Ford, 259 La.
  • State v. Kelly 362 So. 2d 1071 La. 1978
    if offered, this stipulation should have been accepted by the trial court as a means to prove the fact at issue (the death by beating and stab wounds, already proved by the coroner's testimony), without injecting into the jury trial the extraneous prejudice resulting by gruesome photographs ostensibly intro
  • State v. Payton 361 So. 2d 866 La. 1978
    4 Wigmore, Evidence, § 1157 (Chadbourne rev. ed. 1972); (La.
  • State v. Hudson 361 So. 2d 858 La. 1978
  • State v. Harvey 358 So. 2d 1224 La. 1978
  • State v. Lovett 359 So. 2d 163 La. 1978
    State v. Fitzgerald, 248 La.
  • State v. Davis 357 So. 2d 1125 La. 1978
  • State v. Crochet 354 So. 2d 1288 La. 1977
    we held that where the State's proof has been rendered unnecessary by defendant's judicial admission, the court may properly find that the prejudicial nature of the evidence outweighs the now diminished or nonexistent legitimate interest of the State in its admission, and require the State to accede to the
  • State v. Hawthorne 345 So. 2d 1170 La. 1977
  • State v. Bennett 345 So. 2d 1129 La. 1977
  • State v. May 339 So. 2d 764 La. 1976
  • State v. Lee 340 So. 2d 180 La. 1976
  • State v. Redwine 337 So. 2d 1041 La. 1976
    Thus, is inapplicable in this case.
  • State v. Scott 337 So. 2d 1087 La. 1976
    [2] for the proposition that the trial judge should make the determination whether a stipulation as to the identity of the victim could prevent the admission of a photograph of the deceased into evidence, when that picture is being offered to prove the identity of the victim.
  • State v. Hollingsworth 337 So. 2d 461 La. 1976
    Although I concur in the result reached by the majority, I find the disposition of Assignments of Error Nos. 1, 2 and 3 recently handed down by this Court.