Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Korman, 379 So. 2d 1061.

26 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Colin Gilmartin La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
State v. Klein 252 So. 3d 973 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
As the Louisiana Supreme Court stated in State v. Korman , , 1063 (La.
State of Louisiana v. Eshom v. Ashworth La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
State v. Ashworth 178 So. 3d 1148 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Jones 81 So. 3d 236 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Sterling, supra; (1980).
State v. Turner 82 So. 3d 449 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Morrison 55 So. 3d 856 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Grant 52 So. 3d 149 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State of Louisiana v. E. J. F. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Insomuch as the defendant contends that the search warrant was invalid due to the wrong description of the structures to be searched, (citations omitted): The description contained in the search warrant is adequate if it is sufficiently detailed so as to allow the officers to locate the property with reasonable certainty and with reasonable probability that they will not search the wrong premises.
State v. EJF 999 So. 2d 224 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Insomuch as the defendant contends that the search warrant was invalid due to the wrong description of the structures to be searched, (citations omitted): The description contained in the search warrant is adequate if it is sufficiently detailed so as to allow the officers to locate the property with reasonable certainty and with reasonable probability that they will not search the wrong premises.
State v. E.J.F. 999 So. 2d 224 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
Insomuch as the defendant contends that the search warrant was invalid due to the wrong description of the structures to be searched, (citations omitted): The description contained in the search warrant is adequate if it is sufficiently detailed so as to allow the officers to locate the property with reasonable certainty and with reasonable probability that they will not search the wrong premises.
State v. McLeod 843 So. 2d 1268 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
State v. Holmes 791 So. 2d 669 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
State v. Jenkins 764 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
State v. Diggs 715 So. 2d 692 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
State v. Alonzo 675 So. 2d 266 La. 1996
1982); see also 2 Wayne R. LaFave, Search and Seizure, § 4.5(a) at 522 (3d ed. 1996) ("[T]he cases reflect an understanding of the fact that errors can easily occur in the use of numbers, such as an apartment or house number, and that it should be presumed that such an error did occur when other descriptive
State v. Alonzo 661 So. 2d 1043 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
citing Steele v. U.S., 267 U.S. 498 , 45 S.Ct.
State v. Miller 495 So. 2d 422 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
State v. Martin 487 So. 2d 1295 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
the Louisiana Supreme Court reversed a trial court's granting of the defendant's motion to suppress marijuana that was seized during the execution of a warrant.
State v. Brooms 453 So. 2d 673 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
in its discussion of search warrants containing errors of description, the court stated as follows: “A search warrant must particularly describe the place to be searched.
State v. Bailey 446 So. 2d 352 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
State v. Ventry 439 So. 2d 1144 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
State v. Johnson 408 So. 2d 1280 La. 1982
State v. Korman 397 So. 2d 1346 La. 1981
wherein we held that the trial court had erred in its consideration of the validity of the search warrant and in granting defendant's motion to suppress the evidence.
State v. Smith 397 So. 2d 1326 La. 1981
cf., (where warrant authorized search of apartment at 6176 Ponchartrain Boulevard and executing officers knocked on that door first, error in description so great as to invalidate search of accused's apartment at 6178 Ponchartrain Boulevard).
State v. Manzella 392 So. 2d 403 La. 1981