Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Catanese, 368 So. 2d 975.

69 citing documents.

State v. Rault 445 So. 2d 1203 La. 1984
[12] *1218 held that polygraph evidence may be admitted in post conviction proceedings within the discretion of the trial judge and subject to certain guidelines, whenever the evidence is reliable and will aid in the decision.
State v. Humphrey 445 So. 2d 1155 La. 1984
in dicta advanced the opinion that a trial judge may consider polygraph evidence in the context of a motion for a *1159 new trial.
State v. Pendergist 444 So. 2d 306 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
the State Supreme Court expressly held that evidence of a polygraph examination is inadmissible in criminal trials.
Associates Financial Corp. v. Carrick 441 So. 2d 1311 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
as appellants do and, in any event, we do not find that the trial court abused the discretion which appellants contend the trial court has under Catanese to admit and consider polygraph evidence.
State v. Green 443 So. 2d 531 La. 1983
The court rejected defendant's argument that the statement was "part of the process"
Landry v. Bill Garrett Chevrolet, Inc. 430 So. 2d 1051 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
Although noting that the "general acceptance" nevertheless excluded polygraph evidence stating: "...
State v. Chapman 436 So. 2d 451 La. 1983
this court held that the trial court may consider a properly conducted favorable polygraph test result as a factor in support of granting a new trial to serve "the ends of justice".
Criticized State v. Culpepper 434 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1982
criticized the Frye or "general acceptance" standard noting The "general acceptance" standard has been the subject of considerable scholarly criticism in recent years, [footnote omitted] In particular, it has been suggested that the requirement of "general acceptance" is tantamount to a requirement that the
State v. Tonubbee 420 So. 2d 126 La. 1982
State v. Stucke 419 So. 2d 939 La. 1982
we concluded that for numerous reasons it should be the judicial policy of Louisiana to exclude polygraph evidence in criminal trials because its probative value is so outweighed by the reasons for its exclusion, i.e., its accompanying dangers.
State v. Chapman 410 So. 2d 689 La. 1982
which allowed the admission of polygraph evidence at post-trial proceedings.
State v. Humphrey 412 So. 2d 507 La. 1982
ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR NOS. 12 and 14 this court held that polygraph evidence may be admitted in post conviction proceedings, within the discretion and guidelines of the trial judge wherever the evidence is reliable and will aid in the decision.
State v. Davis 407 So. 2d 702 La. 1981
State v. White 389 So. 2d 1300 La. 1980
State v. Catanese 385 So. 2d 235 La. 1980
State v. Sonnier 380 So. 2d 1 La. 1980
State v. Thompson 381 So. 2d 823 La. 1980
holding that the results of PSE tests [1] are not admissible at trial and Section 450 of Title 15 of the Revised Statutes which requires that every confession, admission or declaration sought to be used against anyone must be used in its entirety, the defense contends that the trial judge was in error.
Manale v. Department of Police 376 So. 2d 607 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1979
In a held that the results of polygraph examinations were inadmissible in a trial to determine the guilt or innocence of an accused.
State Ex Rel. Fields v. Maggio 368 So. 2d 1016 La. 1979
[1] But see State v. Catanese, La., , decided this day.