Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Doughty, 379 So. 2d 1088.

94 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Tristan Romero La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2021
State of Louisiana v. Jeffery Wayne Ross La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
State v. Ross 269 So. 3d 1052 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
State of Louisiana v. Nathaniel Climes Thibeaux AKA Nathaniel Thibeaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
State v. Thibeaux 229 So. 3d 967 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Const. art. 1, § 15; (La.
State v. Lowrey 228 So. 3d 779 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State v. Doughty, supra, [ ].
State of Louisiana v. Skylar Frank La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
trial, whether or not a responsive verdict could have been rendered in the first trial as to the charge in the second trial; or (2) Based on a part of a continuous offense for which offense the defendant was in jeopardy in the first trial.” Louisiana uses both the “Blockburger test” and the “same evidence test.” State v. Didier, 262 La.
State v. Frank 192 So. 3d 888 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
in jeopardy in the first trial, whether or not a responsive verdict could have been rendered in the first trial as to the charge in the second trial; or (2) Based on a part of a continuous offense for which offense the defendant was in jeopardy in the first trial.” Louisiana uses both the “Blockburger test” and the “same evidence test.” (La.
State of Louisiana v. Isaac Thomas La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
State v. Didier, 262 La.
State v. Thomas 159 So. 3d 1115 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Didier, 262 La.
State of Louisiana v. Walter Urena La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
State v. Urena 161 So. 3d 701 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Const, art. 1, § 15; ...
State v. Childs 133 So. 3d 104 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Steele, 387 So.2d at 1177
State of Louisiana v. Dana Bowles La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Didier, 262 La.
State of Louisiana v. Corey Joseph Craig La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Bowles 123 So. 3d 350 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Didier, 262 La.
State v. Craig 123 So. 3d 1239 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Mills 120 So. 3d 802 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State of Louisiana v. Dannie Lee Lafleur La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Lafleur 114 So. 3d 666 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Taylor 103 So. 3d 571 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
2221 , 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977)
State v. Hall 85 So. 3d 221 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
2221 , 53 L.Ed.2d 187 (1977)
State of Louisiana v. Alex P. Papillion La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions the test to be applied to determine whether there are two different offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not.”
State v. Papillion 63 So. 3d 414 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions the test to be applied to determine whether there are two different offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not.”
State of Louisiana v. James E. Ramsdell La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Ramsdell 47 So. 3d 78 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State of Louisiana v. Daniel L. Pegues La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
in such cases, where multiple punishment has been erroneously imposed, “the appropriate procedure at the appellate level is to eliminate the effect of the judgment as to the less severely punishable offense.” The attempted manslaughter judgment is the less severely punishable offense
State v. Pegues 43 So. 3d 1008 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
in such cases, where multiple punishment has been erroneously imposed, “the appropriate procedure at the appellate level is to eliminate the effect of the judgment as to the less severely punishable offense.” The attempted manslaughter judgment is the less severely punishable offense, and the conviction and
State of Louisiana v. Richard W. Black La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Black 33 So. 3d 1025 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State of Louisiana v. Walter R. Cox, Sr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State v. Cox 4 So. 3d 998 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State of Louisiana v. Donald O'Conner La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
La.1980); State v. Didier, 262 La.
State v. O'Connor 944 So. 2d 779 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
State v. Didier, 262 La.
State of Louisiana v. Donald Cogswell, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
State v. Didier, 262 La.
State v. Cogswell 918 So. 2d 590 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
State v. Didier, 262 La.
State v. Gardner 907 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
State v. Gibson 867 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
State v. Bates 859 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
State v. Steele, supra ; (La.
State v. Wilson 827 So. 2d 1121 La. 2002
However, I agree with the court of appeal's ultimate conclusion that the defendant's convictions for forgery and theft violated double jeopardy, (simultaneous theft and forgery convictions constituted double jeopardy).
State v. Wilson 806 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
the supreme court held that simultaneous theft and forgery convictions constituted double jeopardy.
State v. Pierce 799 So. 2d 732 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
State v. Arnold 801 So. 2d 408 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
State v. Lowery 781 So. 2d 713 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
State v. Doughty, supra [ ].
State v. Bryant 729 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
State v. President 715 So. 2d 745 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
State v. Bailey 713 So. 2d 588 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
State v. Johnson 711 So. 2d 848 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
State v. Hammond 704 So. 2d 1281 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
State v. Cormier 702 So. 2d 929 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997