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. Miller, 338 So. 2d 678.

27 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Kerri Seeney Monic La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
  • State of Louisiana v. Brian L. Pope La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
  • State of Louisiana Versus Shawn Michael McKinney La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2019
  • State v. Mitchell 181 So. 3d 800 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
    P. art. 802; State v. Perkins, supra.
  • State v. Jones 119 So. 3d 859 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    The Supreme Court, stated that an instruction on justification must be given whenever the defense is arguably supported by the evidence presented at trial, because “the question is not what the judge believed the evidence proved, or even what view this Court has of the evidence.
  • State v. Franklin 87 So. 3d 860 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
  • State v. Richard 902 So. 2d 1271 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    State v. Taylor, 34,096 (La.App.
  • State v. Wallis 871 So. 2d 552 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
  • State v. Taylor 774 So. 2d 379 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
  • State v. Jackson 733 So. 2d 736 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
    an instruction on justification must be given whenever the defense is arguably supported by the evidence presented at trial because "the question is not what the judge believed the evidence proved, or even what view this Court has of the evidence.
  • State v. Moore 640 So. 2d 561 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
    the defendant was threatening the family of his estranged wife with a shotgun.
  • State v. Williams 606 So. 2d 1387 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
    dealing with the defense of justification, and cases cited therein.
  • State v. Holland 544 So. 2d 461 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
  • State v. Saddler 538 So. 2d 1073 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
  • State v. Washington 533 So. 2d 392 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
  • State v. Washington 533 So. 2d 392 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
    Art. 806 clearly states a court “shall not charge the jury concerning the facts of the case....” The defendant’s is misplaced.
  • State v. Lewis 478 So. 2d 665 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
  • State v. Braud 475 So. 2d 29 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
  • State v. Guillot 470 So. 2d 360 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
  • State v. Holmes 467 So. 2d 1177 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
  • State v. Huddleston 463 So. 2d 104 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    ” From our review of the testimonial evidence in the record, we feel that the jurors could have reasonably inferred from the testimony that the defendant may have been entrapped.
  • State v. Birdsong 452 So. 2d 1236 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Simmons 422 So. 2d 138 La. 1982
  • State v. Mead 377 So. 2d 79 La. 1979
  • State v. Clement 368 So. 2d 1037 La. 1979
    art. 807; State v. Youngblood, 235 La.
  • State v. Marse 365 So. 2d 1319 La. 1978
  • State v. George 346 So. 2d 694 La. 1977