Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Curtis, 338 So. 2d 662.

87 citing documents.

State v. Anderson 728 So. 2d 14 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
State v. Henry 709 So. 2d 322 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
State v. Neville 695 So. 2d 534 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
State v. Martin 679 So. 2d 557 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
State v. Young, 27,237 (La.App.2d Cir. 8/23/95), .
State v. Powell 677 So. 2d 1008 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
State v. Thomas, 27,504 (La.App.2d Cir. 11/1/95), .
State v. Monette 670 So. 2d 618 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
identifying a defendant by name alone is insufficient to | aprove habitual offender status.
State v. Thomas 662 So. 2d 798 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
In support, which holds that the mere "identity of name of defendant and the person previously convicted" is not sufficient to establish identity in a multiple offender prosecution.
State v. Young 660 So. 2d 548 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
State v. Jones 631 So. 2d 609 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
State v. Hongo 625 So. 2d 610 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Banks 612 So. 2d 822 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: We do not consider that identity of name of defendant and the person previously convicted is sufficient evidence of identity.
State v. Payne 586 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1991
State v. Hawthorne 580 So. 2d 1131 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
State v. Jarvis 569 So. 2d 163 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
the supreme court stated: We do not consider that identity of name of defendant and the person previously convicted is sufficient evidence of identity.
State v. Shepherd 566 So. 2d 1127 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Rodriguez 553 So. 2d 991 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
established that evidence is insufficient to convict the defendant as a multiple offender when the only link between the defendant and the person who committed the prior felonies is identical names.
State v. Wheatley 550 So. 2d 724 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Spellman 547 So. 2d 1361 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
established that evidence is insufficient to convict the defendant as a multiple offender when the only link between the defendant and the person who committed the prior felonies is identical names.
State ex rel. Hayes 536 So. 2d 1294 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Pitre 532 So. 2d 424 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Pitre 532 So. 2d 422 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Brown 514 So. 2d 99 La. 1987
State v. Moten 510 So. 2d 55 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
State v. Evans 506 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
State v. Brown 496 So. 2d 417 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
at 664 (La.1976), the Louisiana Supreme Court discussed such an issue of identification: Various methods of proof to establish identity have been recognized.
State v. Horton 487 So. 2d 602 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
State v. Anderson 486 So. 2d 783 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
State v. Savoy 487 So. 2d 485 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
State v. Richardson 459 So. 2d 31 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Johnson 457 So. 2d 1251 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
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. Nicholas 359 So. 2d 965 La. 1978
State v. Hamilton 356 So. 2d 1360 La. 1978
State v. Adams 355 So. 2d 917 La. 1978
State v. Skyeagle 345 So. 2d 189 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1977
Hence, might have which he urges we consider, is immaterial.
City of Monroe v. French 345 So. 2d 23 La. 1977