Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Cappo, 345 So. 2d 443.

16 citing documents.

State v. Lindsey 129 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
In support of his claim, wherein the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that a “witness’ corruption may be evidenced by conduct indicating a general scheme to make false charges or claims.” In Cappo , the defendant was prevented from introducing evidence to show a key witness for the State had wrongly accused individuals of partic
State v. Jackson 800 So. 2d 854 La. 2001
State v. Smith 743 So. 2d 199 La. 1999
State v. Smith 713 So. 2d 1220 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
State v. Allen 693 So. 2d 728 La. 1997
State v. Allen 693 So. 2d 728 La. 1997
Fudge v. Levine 647 So. 2d 405 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
State v. Manuel 646 So. 2d 489 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
Walls v. Olin Corp., Inc. 533 So. 2d 1375 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
State v. Brown 467 So. 2d 1151 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
See LRS 15:441, 492, 494; State v. Jackson, 153 La.
State v. Vessell 450 So. 2d 938 La. 1984
this court noted that: We have previously held that a witness cannot be cross-examined as to any fact which is collateral and irrelevant to the issue merely for the purpose of contradicting him by other evidence.
State v. Vaughn 431 So. 2d 358 La. 1983
State v. Humphrey 412 So. 2d 507 La. 1982
See LRS 15:441, 492, 494; State v. Jackson, 153 La.
State v. Smith 369 So. 2d 1300 La. 1979
State v. DeCuir 364 So. 2d 946 La. 1978
However, we held, under the facts of that case, that possible corruption may be shown by evidence that the witness had brought false charges in the past if such evidence was relevant to establish a present motive to falsify testimony.
State v. Occhipinti 358 So. 2d 1209 La. 1978