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. Lemelle, 353 So. 2d 1312.

19 citing documents.

  • State v. Lacaze 208 So. 3d 856 La. 2016
    1979) (“[E]ven the appearance of impartiality, as well as impartiality itself, outweighs the inconvenience caused by recusal of the trial judge.”) ( (La.
  • State v. Lee 15 So. 3d 229 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. SEDE 8 So. 3d 702 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    [h]as been employed or consulted as an attorney in the cause, or has been associated with an *705 attorney during the latter’s employment in the cause.” The party that moves for recusal under that section does not have to show bias, prejudice, or personal interest on the part of the judge but merely employment “in the cause.” State v. Williams, 00-11 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Charles Brown, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    State v. Williams, 00- 11(La.App.
  • State v. Brown 874 So. 2d 318 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
    State v. Williams, 00-0011(La.App.
  • State v. Williams 788 So. 2d 515 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    the defendant, Lemelle, was charged in January 1975 with armed robbery, together with Sylvester Jackson.
  • In Re Lemoine 686 So. 2d 837 La. 1997
    See, (reversing a criminal conviction and remanding for a new trial on the basis that the trial judge should have recused himself); (reversing conviction, remanding for new trial based on judge's failure to recuse); (rev
  • State v. Serio 670 So. 2d 1273 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    this court found that even the appearance of impartiality, as well as impartiality itself, outweighs the inconvenience caused by the recusal of the trial judge.
  • State v. Smith 635 So. 2d 512 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
  • Pierce v. Charity Hosp. of Louisiana 550 So. 2d 211 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
  • State v. Sams 487 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    ” , at page 420 (La.1980).
  • State v. Browning 475 So. 2d 90 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
    See, for example, Zuck v. Alabama, 588 F.2d 436 (5th Cir.1979); People v. Lewis, 88 Ill.2d 429 , 58 Ill.Dec.
  • State v. Simpson 475 So. 2d 1115 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
  • State v. Coleman 410 So. 2d 1079 La. 1982
    we held that an accused has no right to a trial by a particular jury or juror, but only to a trial by a competent, impartial jury.
  • Rollo v. Dison 402 So. 2d 122 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1981
  • State v. Denis 384 So. 2d 419 La. 1980
  • State v. Manning 376 So. 2d 95 La. 1979
    art. 921; State v. McGraw, supra
  • State v. LeBlanc 367 So. 2d 335 La. 1979
    this court found that even the appearance of impartiality, as well as impartiality itself, outweighs the inconvenience caused by the recusal of the trial judge.
  • State v. Willis 364 So. 2d 961 La. 1978