DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State in Interest of Dino, 359 So. 2d 586.

114 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana in the Interest of D.D. La. 2025
    13 26, 32; State in Interest of Dino, overruled on other grounds by State v. Fernandez, 96-2719 (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Joshua Darelle Lewis La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2020
    Under State v. Fernandez, supra, which overruled State in Interest of Dino, (La.
  • State v. Harrell 120 So. 3d 743 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    In setting forth the factors for consideration in assessing the totality of the circumstances, regardless of whether the accused is a juvenile, the Fernandez Court overruled prior jurisprudence in State in the Interest of Dino, ce rt.
  • State v. Fisher 87 So. 3d 189 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    In State v. Fernandez, supra, the supreme court overruled State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State ex rel. A.J. 27 So. 3d 247 La. 2009
    art. 882, this Court in State in the Interest of Dino, found that the right to a jury trial was not among the rights afforded juveniles by due process: |12The juvenile court determined that a person in relator’s circumstances is denied the right to a jury trial by La.
  • In Re State Ex Rel. AJ 27 So. 3d 247 La. 2009
    art. 882, this Court in State in the Interest of Dino, found that the right to a jury trial was not among the rights afforded juveniles by due process: The juvenile court determined that a person in relator's circumstances is denied the right to a jury trial by La.
  • State v. Palmer 14 So. 3d 304 La. 2009
    State in Interest of Dino
  • State v. Lathers 15 So. 3d 1068 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    State in Interest of Dino, ce rt.
  • State in the Interest of J.E. T. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    3 The ruling in Fernandez overruled State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State ex rel. J.E.T. 10 So. 3d 1264 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    However, we note that at the time these two decisions were rendered, State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State Ex Rel. Jet 10 So. 3d 1264 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    However, we note that at the time these two decisions were rendered, State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State Ex Rel. Ab 983 So. 2d 934 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
    The juvenile cites State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State ex rel. A.B. 983 So. 2d 934 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    The juvenile cites State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Harper 970 So. 2d 592 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
    In addition to his claim that the statements were inadmissible hearsay evidence (which is addressed in counseled assignment of error 2), the defendant cites State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Brown 879 So. 2d 1276 La. 2004
    Based on the United States Supreme Court's reasoning in McKeiver , we previously determined due process and fundamental fairness did not require that the juvenile be granted the right to trial by jury, State in the Interest of Dino, -98 (La.1978), [16] even though that right is guaranteed by Article I, § 17 of our state constitution in certain criminal cases.
  • State v. Raiford 846 So. 2d 913 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    In State in the Interest of Dino, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that, for the State to meet its burden of demonstrating that a waiver of Miranda rights by a juvenile was made knowingly and intelligently, it must affirmatively show that the juvenile engaged in a meaningful consultation with an attorney or an informed parent, guardian
  • State v. Moore 827 So. 2d 647 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    Although there is some question as to how long Defendant was able to talk with his father while in the dispatch room at the police station, the requirement of State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State ex rel. D.J. 817 So. 2d 26 La. 2002
    Accordingly, the constitutionality of the absolute prohibition on jury trials in delinquency proceedings under the due process clauses of the Louisiana and United States' Constitutions must be addressed on the merits and affords this Court an opportunity to revisit its holding in State in Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State Ex Rel. Dj 817 So. 2d 26 La. 2002
    Accordingly, the constitutionality of the absolute prohibition on jury trials in delinquency proceedings under the due process clauses of the Louisiana and United States Constitutions must be addressed on the merits and affords this Court an opportunity to revisit its holding in State in Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Hundley 760 So. 2d 417 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
    At the time of Defendant's confession and the suppression hearing, State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Hill 742 So. 2d 690 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    and State in the Interest of Dino
  • State in Interest of JM 743 So. 2d 228 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
    In Fernandez the Louisiana Supreme Court overruled State in the Interest of Dino, certiorari denied, 439 U.S. 1047 , 99 S.Ct.
  • State ex rel. Lewis 737 So. 2d 962 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    The trial judge found that the “police department has failed again to follow the laws as laid out in” State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Green 735 So. 2d 723 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
    The Defendant contends that the police did not comply with the requirements of State in the Interest of Dino
  • State v. Buffington 731 So. 2d 340 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
    In State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Fernandez 712 So. 2d 485 La. 1998
    After a hearing on the motion to suppress, the trial judge suppressed all of the statements made by defendant, stating that the police obtained these statements in violation of the requirements of State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • In Re CB 708 So. 2d 391 La. 1998
    Causey, 363 So.2d at 474 ; See Banks, supra, ; In re Batiste, *398
  • In re C.B. 708 So. 2d 391 La. 1998
    Causey, 363 So.2d at 474 ; See Banks, supra, ; In re Batiste, *398
  • State ex rel. D.L.S. 706 So. 2d 187 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
    State in Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Hammond 706 So. 2d 530 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
    State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • In the Interest of F.M. 706 So. 2d 441 La. 1997
    Even assuming that the defendant gave his first, oral “gist statement” in response to police interrogation and that the officers had failed to advise him of his Miranda rights and failed also to follow the requirements of State In Interest of Dino, the defendant’s subsequent written statement made after the police advised him of his Miranda rights and after they provided him with an opportunity to consult with a concerned adult in compliance with Dino, remained free of any taint from the prior s
  • In the Interest of A.W. 710 So. 2d 248 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    Relying on that codal provision and State in Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. In the Interest of J.M. 687 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    This Court denied the application, stating as follows: In State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • In the Interest of W.C. 679 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    State in the Interest of Dino
  • State in Interest of AH 670 So. 2d 361 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
    In State In Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Stacy 665 So. 2d 390 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
    This procedure was in compliance with State in Interest of Dino
  • In the Interest of Nunez 657 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
    in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State ex rel. Jynes 626 So. 2d 457 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    of Dino, the trial court concluded that the state faded to carry its “heavy burden” to show that defendant engaged in a “meaningful consultation” with his grandmother before making his statement.
  • State v. Garner 621 So. 2d 1203 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
    State in Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Jackson 608 So. 2d 949 La. 1992
    2687 , 101 L.Ed.2d 702 (1988), and In the Interest of Dino, the defense argues that delinquency adjudications while the defendant was a juvenile should be excluded from a capital sentencing hearing on a policy basis, since the law does not hold a minor fully responsible for the consequences of his immaturity.
  • State v. Gachot 609 So. 2d 269 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
    In particular, defendant claims that the police did not comply with the requirements of State in the Interest of Dino, (La.
  • State v. Moseley 587 So. 2d 46 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
    Defendant's initial argument, that, as a 17-year-old, he should have been entitled to speak to an attorney, a parent, or other interested adult prior to the statement is based on defendant's proposed extension of the holding in State in Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Carter 569 So. 2d 1025 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
    in which the court outlined the procedural requirements for obtaining a statement from a juvenile.
  • State v. Stone 570 So. 2d 78 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
    State in the Interest of Dino, (La.
  • State v. Byrd 568 So. 2d 554 La. 1990
    We have held that before any statements given by juveniles can be used, it must be affirmatively shown that the "juvenile engaged in a meaningful consultation with an attorney or an informed parent, guardian, or other adult interested in his welfare before he waived his right to counsel and privilege against self-incrimination[,]" State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Heck 560 So. 2d 611 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
    Heck further argues that Bradley's prior statements should not have been admitted because they were taken in the absence of a concerned adult in violation of State in Interest of Dino
  • State ex rel. Newton 559 So. 2d 801 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
    Const.1974, art. 1, §§ 2, 13; see State of Louisiana in the Interest of Andrew Leonard Dino
  • State ex rel. J.P. 550 So. 2d 942 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    This motion was based on the allegation that the statement was inadmissible because the minor child was interrogated before having actually consulted with a significant adult in violation of the requirements of State in the Interest of Dino, cert.
  • State v. Walker 534 So. 2d 81 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
    State In Interest of Dino, (La.
  • State, in Interest of Wells 532 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
    The first is that the armed robbery was committed while defendant was a juvenile and that for this reason the defendant's statement was obtained in violation of State In Interest of Dino, cert.