Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Ford, 338 So. 2d 107.

98 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Carlos M. Smith La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
State of Louisiana v. Nancy Rogers A/K/A Nancy Lynn Rogers La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
Counsel further asserts, “[a]s appellate counsel was not trial counsel, he and Dr. Rogers would be placed at a disadvantage trying to prove the trial court in [sic] denying her motion to withdraw her plea.” In support of his argument, wherein the supreme court reversed a defendant’s conviction and remanded for retrial where Appellate Counsel did not serve as trial counsel and the court reporter failed to record the testimony of the state’s four witnesses, voir dire, and the state’s opening remar
State of Louisiana v. Desmond Dangelo Dugas La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
a second-degree murder conviction in which appellate counsel did not serve as trial counsel and the court reporter failed to record the testimony of four state witnesses, voir dire, and the State’s opening statement, we held: “Without a complete record from which a transcript for appeal may be prepared
State of Louisiana v. Erick Gail Gragg La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
a second-degree murder conviction in which appellate counsel did not serve as trial counsel and the court reporter failed to record the testimony of four state witnesses, voir dire, and the State’s opening statement, we held: “Without a complete record from which a transcript fo
State Of Louisiana v. Andre D. Coleman La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
1980) ( reversal was required when the record failed to contain the testimony of a State and a defense expert witness); ( La.
State of Louisiana Versus John Spears La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2019
State of Louisiana Versus Elvin D. Villafranca La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2019
In particular, Defendant cites to several cases where convictions have been reversed based upon an incomplete or missing appellate record which denied the defendants their right to appellate review.23 Here, the deficiencies 23 (La.
State of Louisiana Versus Argentina Mesa La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2019
State v. Wilson 208 So. 3d 999 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Debbie E. Adams AKA Debbie Adams La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
(reversal required when record failed to contain the testimony of a State and defense expert witness); (reversal required when record missing the testimony of four State witnesses and the voir dire of prospective jurors).
State of Louisiana v. Mark Wayne Thibodeaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
(reversal required when record failed to contain the testimony of a state and defense expert witness); (reversal required when record was missing the testimony of four state witnesses and the voir dire of prospective jurors).
State v. Thibodeaux 162 So. 3d 665 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
(reversal required when record failed to contain the testimony of a state and defense expert witness); (reversal required when record was missing the testimony of four state witnesses and the voir dire of prospective jurors).
State v. Henderson 136 So. 3d 223 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Const. art. I, § 19; “because the exhibits are not available, it is impossible to determine the merits of this assignment of error, and whether the State met its burden of proof at the multiple bill hearing.
State v. Murphy 131 So. 3d 1013 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
However, the Louisiana Supreme Court has stated that, “where a defendant’s attorney is unable, through no fault of his own, to review a substantial portion of the trial record for errors so that he may properly perform his duty as appellate counsel, the interests of justice require that a defendant be afforded a new, fully-recorded trial.”
State v. Norah 131 So. 3d 172 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
424 , 11 L.Ed.2d 331 (1964)
State of Louisiana v. Darious D. Rogers La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
“[W]here a defendant’s attorney is unable, through no fault of his own, to review a substantial portion of the trial record for errors so that he may properly perform his duty as appellate counsel, the interests of justice require that a defendant be afforded a new, fully recorded trial.” Landry, 751 So.2d at 215
State of Louisiana v. L. W. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
(reversal required in second degree murder case in which record missing the testimony of four state witnesses and the voir dire of prospective jurors); (absence of voir dire transcript from the record did not compromise defendan
State v. Higginbotham 122 So. 3d 1 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
In support of the reversal of defendant’s conviction, and State v. Rooney, 187 La.
State of Louisiana v. Marlon Roberson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
See State v. Landry, 97-0499 (La.6/29/99), (finding appellate record so deficient that the court could not properly review the case for error); Robinson, supra (holding that reversal required when record failed to contain the testimony of a state and defense expert witness); (determining that reversal required when record was missing the testimony of four state witnesses and the voir dire of prospective jurors).
State v. Pierce 89 So. 3d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Thus, “[wjithout a complete record from which a transcript for appeal may be prepared, a defendant’s right of appellate review is rendered meaningless.”
State v. Higginbotham 60 So. 3d 621 La. 2011
“[WJhere a defendant’s attorney is unable, through no fault of his own, to review a substantial portion of the trial record for errors so that he may properly perform his duty as appellate counsel, the interests of justice require that a defendant be afforded a new, fully recorded trial.” Landry, 751 So.2d at 215
State v. Massey 51 So. 3d 808 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
First, “[mjaterial omissions from the transcript of the proceedings at trial bearing on the merits of an appeal will require reversal.” 99-0553 at pp. 20-21, 803 So.2d at 19-20 , (re-versing given that testimony of a state and defense expert witness was missing); (finding omissions material, given that substantial portions of the record were missing, including the testimony of four state witnesses, voir dire examination of prospective jurors, and the prosecutor’s opening statements); see also St
State v. MILANEZ 28 So. 3d 523 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
and the interests of justice require that a defendant be afforded a new, fully-recorded trial.” *525
State v. Johnson 22 So. 3d 205 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
(reversal required when record failed to contain the testimony of a State and defense expert witness); (reversal required when the record is missing the testimony of four State witnesses and the voir dire of prospective jurors).
State v. Stukes 19 So. 3d 1233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
and the interests of justice require that a defendant be afforded a new, fully-recorded trial.”
State v. Neely 3 So. 3d 532 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
State v. TROQUILLE 986 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
1980) (reversal was required when the record failed to contain the testimony of a State and a defense expert witness); (La.
State v. Lemeunier 986 So. 2d 130 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
5 Cir. 7/25/06) , , writ denied, 06-2121 (La.4/20/07), ( (La.
State v. Vincent 978 So. 2d 967 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
NOTES [1] State v. Blank, XXXX-XXXX (La.4/11/07), ().
State v. Zachary 973 So. 2d 176 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
1980) (reversal required when record failed to contain the testimony of a state and a defense expert witness); (La.
State v. Pinion 968 So. 2d 131 La. 2007
(reversal required in second degree murder case in which record missing the testimony of four state witnesses and the voir dire of prospective jurors); (absence of voir dire transcript from the record did not compromise defendant's appeal when affidavit of th
State v. Johnson 967 So. 2d 538 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
State v. Scott 952 So. 2d 60 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
(reversal required when record failed to contain the testimony of a State and defense expert witness); (reversal required when record missing the testimony of four State witnesses and the voir dire of prospective jurors).
State v. Buckley 937 So. 2d 881 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
and the interests of justice require that a defendant be afforded a new, fully-recorded trial.”
State v. Cambre 939 So. 2d 446 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
State v. Ambeau 930 So. 2d 54 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: 19Without a complete record from which a transcript for appeal may be prepared, a defendant’s right of appellate review is rendered meaningless.
State v. Scott 913 So. 2d 843 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
State v. Sublet 904 So. 2d 778 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
State v. Walker 844 So. 2d 1060 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
the Louisiana State Supreme Court stated as follows: Without a complete record from which a transcript for appeal may be prepared, a defendant's right of appellate review is rendered meaningless.
State v. Young 839 So. 2d 186 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
13:961(C)(providing that in criminal cases tried in district court the court reporter "shall record all portions of the proceedings required by law or the court.") [4] (reversing given that testimony of a state and defense expert witness was missing); (finding omissions material given that substantial portions of the record were missing, including the testimony of four State witnesses, voir dire examination of prospective jurors, and the prosecutor's opening statements); see also State v. Bright
State v. Weber 834 So. 2d 540 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: Without a complete record from which a transcript for appeal may be prepared, a defendant’s right of appellate review is rendered meaningless.
State v. Santee 834 So. 2d 533 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
Const. art. I, § 19 (1974)
State v. Simpson 829 So. 2d 650 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
99-0553 at pp. 20-21, 803 So.2d at 19 -20 ((reversing given that testimony of a state and defense expert witness was missing); (finding omissions material given that substantial portions of the record were missing, including the testimony of four State witnesses, voir dire examination of prospective jurors, and the prosecutor's opening statements); see also State v. Bright, XXXX-XXXX (La.App.
State v. Williams 828 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
art. 843; State v. Mamon, 26,337 (La.App.2d Cir.12/16/94), , writ denied, 95-0220 (La.6/2/95), .
State v. Juarbe 824 So. 2d 1240 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
(reversal required when record failed to contain the testimony of a State and defense expert witness); (reversal required when record missing the testimony of four State witnesses and the voir dire of prospective jurors).
State v. Harry 823 So. 2d 987 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
99-05 at pp. 20-21, 803 So.2d at 19 -20 () (reversing given that testimony of a state and defense expert witness was missing); (finding omissions material given that substantial portions of the record were missing, including the testimony of four State witnesses, voir dire examination of prospective jurors, and the prosecutor's opening statements); see also State v. Bright, XXXX-XXXX (La.App.
State v. Bridgewater 823 So. 2d 877 La. 2002
State v. Harris 817 So. 2d 1164 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
State v. Bright 809 So. 2d 1112 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
State v. Marshall 812 So. 2d 79 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
the court stated: Without a complete record from which a transcript for appeal may be prepared, a defendant’s right of appellate review is rendered meaningless.