Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Benson, 368 So. 2d 716.
- State v. White 250 So. 3d 262 La. 2018
- State of Louisiana v. Darwin Gauthier La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
- State v. Gauthier 916 So. 2d 314 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
- State v. Gordon 803 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
-
State v. East
745 So. 2d 812
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
The importance of the “circumstances of the particular case”
- State v. Henderson 684 So. 2d 1054 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
- State v. Prout 672 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
- State v. Cannon 658 So. 2d 728 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
-
State v. Minor
580 So. 2d 975
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
In support of his argument, 1 wherein the Supreme Court held that denying a Motion for Continuance when important evidence is revealed to the defense only a matter of days prior to trial constitutes an abuse of discretion.
- State v. Nelson 562 So. 2d 1076 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
-
State v. Hall
549 So. 2d 373
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
in which the state declared its intent to introduce expert handwriting analysis of a robbery note allegedly written by the defendant.
- State v. Ray 547 So. 2d 1350 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
- State v. Roy 496 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
- State v. Wilson 454 So. 2d 383 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
- State v. Brooks 452 So. 2d 149 La. 1984
- State v. Guidry 432 So. 2d 1118 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
- State v. Dupre 408 So. 2d 1229 La. 1982
- State v. Simpson 403 So. 2d 1214 La. 1981
-
State v. Russell
397 So. 2d 1319
La. 1981
State v. Parsley, supra; (La.
- State v. Gordy 380 So. 2d 1347 La. 1980
-
Distinguished
State v. Belton
377 So. 2d 1229
La. 1979
in which we reversed defendant’s conviction because the trial judge denied defendant’s motion for a continuance during which a transcript of the preliminary examination could have been made.
-
State v. Durio
371 So. 2d 1158
La. 1979
(La.1979), this Court reversed a conviction for denial of a continuance even without a showing that exculpatory evidence would have been presented, and without a specific allegation or showing of prejudice, where counsel, whose diligence was not seriously questioned, had only three days (over a weekend) to evaluate
- State v. Parsley 369 So. 2d 1292 La. 1979