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. Gibbs, 355 So. 2d 1299.

15 citing documents.

  • State v. Tapps 832 So. 2d 995 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    He alleges that such an instruction is patently erroneous thereby negating the necessity for a contemporaneous objection
  • State v. Pugh 750 So. 2d 313 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    *316 To support his argument that the charge at issue is constitutionally defective
  • Criticized State v. Sam 623 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    You must not resort to extraneous facts or circumstance in reaching your verdict.” where it characterized a similar charge as “patently erroneous,” and instructed that it “should not be given.” 2 This language was held objectionable because La.C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Johnson 598 So. 2d 1288 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
    See, ” Henderson, supra, 362 So.2d at 1366 .
  • State v. Holland 544 So. 2d 461 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
  • State v. Smith 491 So. 2d 641 La. 1986
    art. 770; (3) whether, taken as a whole, the final charge to the jury erroneously instructed the jury that it could not go beyond the evidence to find a reasonable doubt
  • State v. Lowery 491 So. 2d 726 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    Lowery next argues the jury charges are strikingly similar, if not identical
  • State v. Smith 470 So. 2d 128 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
    Furthermore, the latter portion of that instruction, argued by defendants to negate the first portion, in that it instructs the jury, as our emphasis shows, not to go beyond the evidence either to acquit or to convict.
  • State v. Simms 465 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
  • State v. Vessell 450 So. 2d 938 La. 1984
  • State v. Edwards 419 So. 2d 881 La. 1982
    The source of defendant's Special Requested Charge No. 4 (La.
  • State v. Donahue 408 So. 2d 1262 La. 1982
    because it did not advise the jury that it was entitled to acquit "because it was not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt because of lack of evidence as to an essential element of the crime" did not contain the reference to lack of evidence contained in the charge here given.
  • Criticized State v. MacK 403 So. 2d 8 La. 1981
    This jury instruction tracks verbatim a
  • State v. McAllister 366 So. 2d 1340 La. 1978
  • State v. Henderson 362 So. 2d 1358 La. 1978