Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Simpson, 371 So. 2d 733.

14 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Lee R. Jackson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
State v. Givens, 97–17 (La.App.
State of Louisiana v. Rasheed McClebb La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
art. 775.1, to seek immediate review of the trial court’s mistrial ruling, defendant, relying on Joseph, supra, (La.
State of Louisiana v. Sherman R. Holloway La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
State v. Copelin 206 So. 3d 990 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Smith 7 So. 3d 855 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
State v. Dickerson 760 So. 2d 503 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
State v. Givens, 97-17 (La.App.
State v. Asprilla 734 So. 2d 685 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
the court stated that “situations may arise in which it may seem advisable to declare the mistrial without the defendant’s consent, but which do not fit into the circumstances enumerated in Article 775.
State v. DeGrate 634 So. 2d 965 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
State v. Bernard 514 So. 2d 633 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
State v. Mitchell 466 So. 2d 514 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
State v. Picchini 463 So. 2d 714 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
State v. Young 443 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
State v. Joseph 434 So. 2d 1057 La. 1983
a mistrial was declared by the trial judge for what he perceived was the state's interest after the state protested that defense counsel's questioning of a key state witness was unfairly emphasizing the possibility that the witness had prior convictions when it was evident that there were no such convictions
State v. Albert 430 So. 2d 1279 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
We find this case falls under the rule of Lawson, supra, (La.