Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Donahue, 355 So. 2d 247.

21 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Kentrell D. McElroy La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
the institution of prosecution for second degree murder and armed robbery was by bill of information.
State v. McElroy 241 So. 3d 424 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
In State v. Donahue , the institution of prosecution for second degree murder and armed robbery was by bill of information.
State v. Steward 213 So. 3d 1174 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2017
State v. Engel 131 So. 3d 1017 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
See, State v. Bates, 11-721 (La.App.
State v. Bates 113 So. 3d 411 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Underdonk 92 So. 3d 369 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Tassin 998 So. 2d 278 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
*281 In support of his argument that the error he complains of is jurisdictional, wherein the Louisiana Supreme Court found that a prosecution for second-degree murder which was brought by bill of information rather than by a grand jury indictment was null.
State of Louisiana v. Deandre Johnson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Grand Jury Issue In support of his position, wherein the supreme court concluded that a prosecution for second-degree murder, brought by bill of information rather than by a grand jury indictment, was an absolute nullity.3 However, not only do we find that the decision in Donahue is distinguishable from the issue now before us, but the jurispruden
State of Louisiana v. Melvin Tassin La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
In support of his argument that the error he complains of is jurisdictional, wherein the Louisiana Supreme Court found that a prosecution for second-degree murder which was brought by bill of information rather than by a grand jury indictment was null.
State v. Johnson 996 So. 2d 1235 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Grand Jury Issue In support of his position, wherein the supreme court concluded that a prosecution for second-degree murder, brought by bill of information rather than by a grand jury indictment, was an absolute nullity.
State v. Mathews 809 So. 2d 1002 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
The defendants argue that this is analogous to the state bringing the charges by bill of information
State v. Smith 542 So. 2d 175 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. King 524 So. 2d 1376 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
15:447 and 448; State v. Pollard, 438 So.2d at 1211 .
State v. Brunet 521 So. 2d 594 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Freeman 447 So. 2d 1145 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
State v. Gary 445 So. 2d 200 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
Followed State v. Ruple 437 So. 2d 873 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
(1976); State v. Donahue, *876 (1978); (1980)."
State v. Stewart 389 So. 2d 1321 La. 1980
where the district attorney nolle prosequied a first degree murder indictment and reinstituted the prosecution by a bill of information.
State v. Davis 385 So. 2d 193 La. 1980
To support his argument that defendant was deprived of his constitutional right, in which we reversed a conviction because the district attorney, after nolle prossing a grand jury indictment of first degree murder, reinstituted prosecution by a bill of information charging the defendant with second degree murder.
State v. Williams 383 So. 2d 369 La. 1980
State v. Cramer 358 So. 2d 1277 La. 1978
Arguably the conviction on the principal count would be affirmed, even though we sustained the motion to quash on the subsidiary counts of each incident (which involve contemporaneous acts admissible in evidence as res gestae)