DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Franks, 363 So. 2d 518.

21 citing documents.

  • State Of Louisiana v. Ollie Montrell Selders, Jr. La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    2d at 681; Brady, 381 So.2d at 822; State a Franks, ( La.
  • State v. Mills 259 So. 3d 1045 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    See Rankin, 465 So.2d at 681 ; Brady, 381 So.2d at 822 ; , 520 (La.
  • State v. Mills 153 So. 3d 481 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    See State v. Rankin, 465 So.2d at 681
  • State v. Bowie 813 So. 2d 377 La. 2002
  • State v. Burbank 811 So. 2d 1112 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
  • State v. Thomas 747 So. 2d 610 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
    See, (calling the prosecutor to admit or deny that the witness might receive favorable treatment); (La.App.
  • State v. Campbell 566 So. 2d 1038 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
    the Supreme Court held: "[W]hen an officer's testimony at trial is from his report rather than from his memory, that is, if the testimony is the product of past recollection recorded rather than present memory refreshed, the trial judge should require production of the report for defense inspection.
  • State v. Lilly 552 So. 2d 1036 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
  • State v. Shropshire 471 So. 2d 707 La. 1985
    State v. Square, 257 La.
  • State v. Rankin 465 So. 2d 679 La. 1985
  • State v. Johnson 458 So. 2d 539 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
    clear that the only instances where the defendant is entitled to a copy of the police report are, first, when the officer testifies exclusively from past recollection recorded whether in his possession or not, and second, when the officer acknowledges that he is testifying from his police report when in his possession on the witness stand
  • State v. Rankin 454 So. 2d 880 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Lucky 453 So. 2d 1234 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Gabriel 450 So. 2d 611 La. 1984
    at 502 (La.1981); at 520 (La.1978).
  • State v. Silva 447 So. 2d 1242 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
    information, and we therefore find no merit in defendant's complaints of the trial court's refusal to suppress and to order the state to give defendant the name of the informant () and the police officer's notes concerning past reliable information obtained from the informant (thus not concerning the officer's eyewitness testimony) ().
  • State v. Prudholm 446 So. 2d 729 La. 1984
  • State v. Cannon 441 So. 2d 1259 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    State v. Robinson, [ ]; State v. Lewis, 236 La.
  • State v. Kimble 407 So. 2d 693 La. 1981
  • State v. Tauzier 397 So. 2d 494 La. 1981
    this Court stated: "Police reports are considered confidential and generally the state may not be compelled to produce them for inspection.
  • State v. Brady 381 So. 2d 819 La. 1980
    (La.1979); State v. Robinson, supra ; State v. Lewis, 236 La.
  • State v. Valentine 375 So. 2d 1378 La. 1979