Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Durio, 371 So. 2d 1158.

39 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Deon Ray Bartie La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
The Matthews court noted that a
State v. Stipe 167 So. 3d 942 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
2 Cir. 9/17/08), , writ denied, 08-2371 (La.5/22/09), ().
State v. Victor 82 So. 3d 301 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Franklin 996 So. 2d 387 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
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. Hart 881 So. 2d 1237 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
The Louisiana Supreme Court has adopted, the standard for determining causation in fact that is approved by the LaFave and Scott treatise on criminal law.
State v. Wood 793 So. 2d 441 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
3103 , 61 L.Ed.2d 876 (1979)
State v. Stone 758 So. 2d 997 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
State v. Snyder 750 So. 2d 832 La. 1999
State v. Richardson 729 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
State v. MacKey 687 So. 2d 465 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
State v. Prout 672 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
State v. Jones 598 So. 2d 511 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
-647 (La.1984); -1164 (La.1979).
State v. Sanchez 516 So. 2d 415 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
State v. O'Meara 479 So. 2d 1059 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
and cases cited therein; State v. *1061 Gaskin, (La.App.
State v. Sampson 480 So. 2d 952 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
State v. Mosely 475 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
The Louisiana Supreme Court has adopted, the standard for determining causation in fact that is approved by the LaFave and Scott treatise on criminal law.
State v. Hamilton 459 So. 2d 216 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
State v. Jackson 452 So. 2d 1225 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
State v. Davis 451 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Matthews 450 So. 2d 644 La. 1984
A : "Was the defendant's conduct a substantial factor in bringing about the forbidden result?"
State v. Peterson 446 So. 2d 815 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
State v. Williams 445 So. 2d 1264 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
State v. Parrish 434 So. 2d 475 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
State v. Guidry 432 So. 2d 1118 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
State v. Barrios 425 So. 2d 980 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1983
held that "* * * The general rule is that the denial of a continuance is not ground for reversal absent an abuse of discretion.
State v. Allnet 419 So. 2d 472 La. 1982
State v. Vaccaro 411 So. 2d 415 La. 1982
State v. Dupre 408 So. 2d 1229 La. 1982
State v. Coleman 406 So. 2d 563 La. 1981
State v. Haarala 398 So. 2d 1093 La. 1981
State v. Tauzier 397 So. 2d 494 La. 1981
State v. Jones 395 So. 2d 751 La. 1981
State v. Ordonez 395 So. 2d 778 La. 1981
State v. McPhate 393 So. 2d 718 La. 1981
The general rules governing the disposition of a where it was held as follows: "Article 712 of the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure provides that: `[a] motion for continuance, if timely filed, may be granted, in the discretion of the court, in any case if there is good ground therefor.'
State v. Chaney 384 So. 2d 442 La. 1980
[5] However, *446 in one of those cases, we made the following observation: "...
State v. Gordy 380 So. 2d 1347 La. 1980
State v. Benson, supra; State v. English, supra.
State v. Echols 376 So. 2d 1244 La. 1979

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by