Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Hatcher, 372 So. 2d 1024.

125 citing documents.

State Of Louisiana v. Roderick Hackett La. 2022
State Of Louisiana v. David H. Brown (Parish of Lafourche) Convictions Affirmed; Death Sentences Reversed; Case Remanded For … La. 2021
State of Louisiana v. Troy Allen La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
11/16/12), citing Lee, supra, (La.
State of Louisiana v. Joseph Taylor 217 So. 3d 283 La. 2016
of the jury, that the extraneous acts are probative of a real issue and that their probative value exceeds their prejudicial effect.” However, despite the pronouncement in Lukehahr, the Prieur court did not prohibit such a hearing and the jurisprudence that developed after Prieur certainly envisioned a pre-trial hearing, commonly referred to as a “Prieur hearing.” See, (La.
State of Louisiana v. William Chester Farry Jr. AKA William Chester Farry AKA William C. Farry AKA William … La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
State v. Farry 206 So. 3d 1222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Greenberry 154 So. 3d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State of Louisiana v. Nathaniel Wayne Carmouche La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
On appeal, Defendant claims it was error for the trial court to allow this testimony, and State v. Pollard, 98-1376 (La.App.
State v. Carmouche 145 So. 3d 1101 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
On appeal, Defendant claims it was error for the trial court to allow this testimony, and State v. Pollard, 98-1376 (La.App.
State of Louisiana v. Ted Dwayne Stevens, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
Lee, 05-2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139
State v. Stevens 140 So. 3d 1267 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Lee , 05-2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139
State v. Grimes 109 So. 3d 1007 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Garcia 108 So. 3d 1 La. 2012
Lee , 05-2098 at p. 44, 976 So.2d at 139
State v. Trim 107 So. 3d 656 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
(Tate, J., concurring on rehearing).
State v. Barnes 100 So. 3d 926 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Bruce 93 So. 3d 717 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
826 , 151 L.Ed.2d 707 (2002)
State v. Williams 85 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Jones 85 So. 3d 224 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Odenbaugh 82 So. 3d 215 La. 2011
State v. Willis 75 So. 3d 17 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Richardson 71 So. 3d 492 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
826 , 151 L.Ed.2d 707 (2002)
State of Louisiana v. Lester Williams La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Camp 59 So. 3d 548 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
826 , 151 L.Ed.2d 707 (2002)
State v. Brooks 58 So. 3d 506 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
826 , 151 L.Ed.2d 707 (2002)
State v. White 57 So. 3d 1078 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
826 , 151 L.Ed.2d 707 (2002)
State v. Blow 46 So. 3d 735 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
826 , 151 L.Ed.2d 707 (2002)
State v. Lawrence 32 So. 3d 329 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Williams 28 So. 3d 357 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
(Tate, J., concurring on rehearing).
State v. Ridgley 7 So. 3d 689 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Malone 998 So. 2d 322 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
Toomer noted that evidence is not hearsay when offered to prove only that it occurred, (La.
State v. Lee 976 So. 2d 109 La. 2008
State v. Alsup 968 So. 2d 1152 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
826 , 151 L.Ed.2d 707 (2002)
State v. Anderson 942 So. 2d 625 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
826 , 151 L.Ed.2d 707 (2002)
State v. Rose 925 So. 2d 34 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
State of Louisiana v. William Odell Cash La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
644, 650, 136 L.Ed.2d 574 (1997); (Tate, J., concurring) (“Other-crime evidence may not be used to prove that the offender committed this crime simply because he had committed similar crimes in the past.”).
State v. Cash 861 So. 2d 851 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
644, 650 , 136 L.Ed.2d 574 (1997); (Tate, J., concurring) ("Other-crime evidence may not be used to prove that the offender committed this crime simply because he had committed similar crimes in the past.").
State v. Galliano 839 So. 2d 932 La. 2003
State v. Cooks 833 So. 2d 1034 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
State v. Murray 827 So. 2d 488 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
826 , 151 L.Ed.2d 707 (2002)
State v. Jacobs 803 So. 2d 933 La. 2001
State v. Morgan 791 So. 2d 100 La. 2001
644, 650 , 136 L.Ed.2d 574 (1997); (Tate, J., concurring) ("Other-crime evidence may not be used to prove that the offender committed this crime simply because he had committed similar crimes in the past.").
State v. Kennedy 803 So. 2d 916 La. 2001
Kirkland v. Entergy New Orleans, Inc. 779 So. 2d 42 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
State v. Tilley 767 So. 2d 6 La. 2000
State v. Pollard 760 So. 2d 362 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
[1] the Supreme Court sets forth guidelines for determining the admissibility of evidence of other crimes: (1) There must be clear and convincing evidence that the defendant committed the other crimes ( )
State v. Arrington 738 So. 2d 1087 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
State v. Harge 730 So. 2d 983 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
State v. McArthur 719 So. 2d 1037 La. 1998
State v. Miller 718 So. 2d 960 La. 1998
State v. Matthews 720 So. 2d 153 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998