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. Williams, 338 So. 2d 1365.

14 citing documents.

  • State v. Lee 976 So. 2d 109 La. 2008
    at 2335 ; (when affidavit that contained no *127 attestation to reliability of informant, nor disclosed informant's basis for conclusions, it could not support issuance of search warrant).
  • State v. Loera 530 So. 2d 1271 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
    See and compare State v. Williams, *1280
  • Followed State v. Washington 482 So. 2d 171 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    We follow the Louisiana Supreme Court which, in upholding a at 1369 (La.1976), stated: In reaching our conclusion, we have been conscious of the warning in Ventresca [United States v. Ventresca, 380 U.S. 102 , 85 S.Ct.
  • Followed State v. Washington 482 So. 2d 171 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
    We follow the Louisiana Supreme Court which, in upholding a at 1369 (La.1976), stated: In reaching our conclusion, we have been conscious of the warning in Ventresca [ United States v. Ventresca, 380 U.S. 102 , 85 S.Ct.
  • State v. Dooley 447 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
    Likewise, defendants’ fails to recognize that the court in Williams first rejected the information obtained from the informant because there was no attestation to his reliability and no factual basis for his conclusion that drugs were being sold at the searched premises.
  • State v. Ditcharo 441 So. 2d 326 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    741 , 13 L.Ed.2d 684 (1965)
  • State v. Tate 407 So. 2d 1133 La. 1981
    741 , 13 L.Ed.2d 684 (1965)
  • State v. McCathern 395 So. 2d 746 La. 1981
  • State v. Wichers 392 So. 2d 419 La. 1980
  • State v. Baker 389 So. 2d 1289 La. 1980
  • State v. Wollfarth 376 So. 2d 107 La. 1979
    quoting Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct.
  • State v. Richards 357 So. 2d 1128 La. 1978
  • State v. Segers 355 So. 2d 238 La. 1978
    1 , 553 F.2d 146 (1977); United States v. Harper, 550 F.2d 610 (10th Cir. 1977); United States v. Harvey, 540 F.2d 1345 (8th Cir. 1976)
  • State v. Joseph 351 So. 2d 1162 La. 1977
    There was not present a "continuous stream of highly unusual conduct" (La.