Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Bailey, 367 So. 2d 368.

27 citing documents.

Keith Ezidore Versus Timothy Hooper, Warden La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2025
Vale, 666 So.2d at 1072; -756 (La.1985); (When circumstances indicated the witness might have received the impression that testimony favorable to the State would result in dropping of charges against him, defendant was entitled to new trial where information was not revealed.)
State of Louisiana v. Michael Duck La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2022
State of Louisiana v. Quint Mire La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
Vale, 666 So.2d at 1072; –756 (La.1985); (When circumstances indicated the witness might have received the impression that testimony favorable to the State would result in dropping of charges against him, defendant was entitled to new trial where information was not revealed.)
State v. Mire 149 So. 3d 981 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Vale, 666 So.2d at 1072 ; -756 (La.1985); (When circumstances indicated the witness might have received the impression that testimony favorable to the State would result in dropping of charges against him, defendant was entitled to new trial where information was not revealed.)
State of Louisiana v. Sean Bernard Newton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Vale, 666 So.2d at 1072; -756 (La.1985); (When circumstances indicated the witness might have received the impression that testimony favorable to the State would result in dropping of charges 11 against him, defendant was entitled to new trial where information was not reveale
State of Louisiana v. Nina Lambert Newton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
Vale, 666 So.2d at 1072; -756 (La.1985); (When circumstances indicated the witness might have received the impression that testimony favorable to the State would result in dropping of charges against him, defendant was entitled to new trial where information was not revealed.)
State v. Newton 129 So. 3d 25 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Vale, 666 So.2d at 1072 ; -756 (La.1985); (When circumstances indicated the witness might have received the impression that testimony favorable to the State would result in dropping of charges against him, defendant was entitled to new trial where information was not revealed.)
State v. Newton 129 So. 3d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
Vale, 666 So.2d at 1072 ; -756 (La.1985); (When circumstances indicated the witness might have received the impression that testimony favorable to the State would result in dropping of charges |12against him, defendant was entitled to new trial where information was not revealed.)
State v. Howard 106 So. 3d 1038 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
763 , 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972); La.
State v. Sparks 68 So. 3d 435 La. 2011
Vale, 666 So.2d at 1072 ; -756 (La.1985); (When circumstances indicated the witness might have received the impression that testimony favorable to the State would result in dropping of charges against him, defendant was entitled to new trial where information was not revealed.)
State v. Hopkins 897 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
Brady v. Maryland, supra
State v. Anderson 889 So. 2d 1237 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963)
State v. Jones 880 So. 2d 962 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 *967 (1963)
State v. Nightengale 818 So. 2d 819 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963)
State v. Bowie 813 So. 2d 377 La. 2002
State v. Lindsey 671 So. 2d 1155 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
See Giglio, supra (promise of immunity to defendant's coconspirator); (release of witness facing felony charge from prison prior to accused's trial).
Distinguished State v. Vale 650 So. 2d 379 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
1 ipThe cases submitted by appellants, are factually distinguishable from Bergeron’s situation.
State v. Lindsey 621 So. 2d 618 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963)
State v. Smith 591 So. 2d 1219 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
where the State failed to disclose impeachment evidence against the State's only witness concerning any deals he may have made with the State concerning his arrest on a separate charge the day before trial.
State v. Anderson 517 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
State v. Humphrey 445 So. 2d 1155 La. 1984
763 , 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972)
State v. Cannon 441 So. 2d 1259 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
State v. Robinson, [ ]; State v. Lewis, 236 La.
State v. Talbot 408 So. 2d 861 La. 1981
763 , 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972); (La.
State v. Brooks 386 So. 2d 1348 La. 1980
For Louisiana jurisprudence discussing and applying the Brady-Agurs principles
State v. Landry 388 So. 2d 699 La. 1980
763 , 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972)
State v. Brady 381 So. 2d 819 La. 1980
(La.1979); State v. Robinson, supra ; State v. Lewis, 236 La.
State v. Roussel 381 So. 2d 796 La. 1980
763 , 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972)