Cited by
Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Killcrease, 379 So. 2d 737.
- State Of Louisiana v. Alexis Michelle Zebley La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2025
-
State v. Loicana
254 So. 3d 761
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
See State v. Killcrease , , 739 (La.
-
State v. Escoto
41 So. 3d 1160
La. 2010
LaRue, 368 So.2d at 1051
- State v. Griffin 984 So. 2d 97 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
-
State v. Robinson
743 So. 2d 814
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
: A valid inventory search is conducted not on probable cause to secure evidence, but merely to inventory the vehicle’s contents in order to safeguard them, as an incident to the vehicle’s necessarily being taken into lawful police custody.
- State v. Daigle 610 So. 2d 1107 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
- State v. Tucker 591 So. 2d 1208 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
-
State v. Short
588 So. 2d 151
La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
: A valid inventory search is conducted not on probable cause to secure evidence, but merely to inventory the vehicle’s contents in order to safeguard them, as an incident to the vehicle’s necessarily being taken into lawful police custody.
- State v. Rack 585 So. 2d 1215 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
- State v. Washington 540 So. 2d 502 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
- State v. Washington 540 So. 2d 502 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
- State v. Knippers 535 So. 2d 403 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
-
State v. Harris
504 So. 2d 156
La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
A brief written opinion was rendered soon thereafter in which the court ruled that the "inventory search" (La.
- State v. Carey 499 So. 2d 283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
- State v. Dorociak 493 So. 2d 173 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
- State v. Moak 427 So. 2d 1233 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
- State v. Osbon 426 So. 2d 323 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
- State v. Sims 426 So. 2d 148 La. 1983
- State v. Jernigan 390 So. 2d 1306 La. 1980
-
State v. Hardy
384 So. 2d 432
La. 1980
Recently, we considered the purpose and justification for an inventory search and reiterated the rule that where the conduct of the police was inconsistent with their contention that the search was conducted for true inventory purposes, we have found the search to be unlawful.