Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Paster, 373 So. 2d 170.

57 citing documents.

State v. Epperley 151 So. 3d 721 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In Re Matter Under Investigation 15 So. 3d 972 La. 2009
Finally, in In the Interest of C.C., the appellate court, in determining that a motion seeking a return of property should be brought in a separate civil proceeding
State v. Boyer 967 So. 2d 458 La. 2007
State ex rel. C.C. 864 So. 2d 663 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
in support of its position.
State v. Iron 780 So. 2d 1123 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
: To admit demonstrative evidence at trial, the law requires that the object be identified.
State v. Brooks 756 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
State v. President 715 So. 2d 745 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
State v. Green 683 So. 2d 1292 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
State v. Fann 597 So. 2d 1230 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
State v. Sneed 571 So. 2d 735 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Revere 572 So. 2d 117 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Johnson 558 So. 2d 325 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
State v. Anderson 554 So. 2d 133 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Livings 548 So. 2d 77 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Everett 530 So. 2d 615 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
State v. Lee 524 So. 2d 1176 La. 1988
State v. Hodges 526 So. 2d 1275 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 , 98 S.Ct.
State v. Shrader 514 So. 2d 213 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
State v. White 508 So. 2d 982 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
State v. Long 473 So. 2d 901 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
the requirements for the admissibility of demonstrative evidence was stated as follows: “To admit demonstrative evidence at trial, the law requires that the object be identified.
State v. Macaluso 473 So. 2d 375 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
State v. King 471 So. 2d 1181 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
State v. Richmond 464 So. 2d 430 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Smith 463 So. 2d 1003 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
State v. Robinson 461 So. 2d 403 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
on appeal after remand, , La., 1980).
State v. Bosley 454 So. 2d 1245 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
State v. Bailey 452 So. 2d 756 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
Lincecum v. Missouri Pacific RR Co. 452 So. 2d 1182 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Olsen 446 So. 2d 439 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Adams 446 So. 2d 355 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
State v. Guillory 438 So. 2d 1256 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
Overruled State v. Knighton 436 So. 2d 1141 La. 1983
: To admit demonstrative evidence at trial, the law requires that the object be identified.
State v. Mann 431 So. 2d 862 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
State v. Sims 426 So. 2d 148 La. 1983
: To admit demonstrative evidence at trial, the law requires that the object be identified.
State v. Tonubbee 420 So. 2d 126 La. 1982
: "To admit demonstrative evidence at trial, the law requires that the object be identified.
State v. Williams 420 So. 2d 1116 La. 1982
State v. McCabe 420 So. 2d 955 La. 1982
State v. Felde 422 So. 2d 370 La. 1982
State v. Sharp 414 So. 2d 752 La. 1982
on appeal after remand, , (La.,1980).
State v. Brannon 414 So. 2d 335 La. 1982
State v. Mosley 412 So. 2d 527 La. 1982
State v. Davis 411 So. 2d 434 La. 1982
State v. Lehnen 403 So. 2d 683 La. 1981
State v. Hudgins 400 So. 2d 889 La. 1981
this court stated: "To admit demonstrative evidence at trial, the law requires that the object be identified.
State v. Garrison 400 So. 2d 874 La. 1981
this Court in rejecting a defendant's contention that exhibits were erroneously admitted because the chain of custody was not properly established said: "To admit demonstrative evidence at trial, the law requires that the object be identified.
State v. Haarala 398 So. 2d 1093 La. 1981
State v. Nicholas 397 So. 2d 1308 La. 1981
State v. Smith 397 So. 2d 1326 La. 1981
State v. Lawson 393 So. 2d 1260 La. 1981
State v. Turner 392 So. 2d 436 La. 1980