Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Simms, 381 So. 2d 472.

35 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Deonta Ware La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
3rd Cir.1983) by this court, which stated: “[i]n where the prosecutor commented on rebuttal that the defendant had failed to call a witness to the stand to support his position, the court held this was permissible under C.Cr.P.
State of Louisiana v. Christopher K. Mayeux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Mayeux 128 So. 3d 998 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Dyer 101 So. 3d 38 La. 2012
State v. Marrero 92 So. 3d 21 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Pennison 986 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
State of Louisiana v. Calvin Joseph Celestine, II La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
.’ ” On review, the availability of Hampton’s boyfriend is not clear; however, it appears the Defendant made no attempt to raise the adverse presumption rule below.
State v. Farhood 844 So. 2d 217 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Berry 645 So. 2d 757 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
State in Interest of JG 641 So. 2d 633 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
State v. Tolliver 621 So. 2d 17 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Spears 525 So. 2d 329 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
defendant argues that the prosecutor's comments "improperly invoked" the presumption contained in LSA-R.S.
State v. Digilormo 505 So. 2d 1154 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
State v. LeBlanc 497 So. 2d 387 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
State v. Sharlow 493 So. 2d 213 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
State v. Williams 483 So. 2d 626 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
the Supreme Court of Louisiana noted: “The presumption of ...
State v. Robinson 480 So. 2d 329 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
3rd Cir.1983) by this court, which stated: “[i]n where the prosecutor commented on rebuttal that the defendant had failed to call a witness to the stand to support his position, the court held this was permissible under C.Cr.P.
State v. Harrison 471 So. 2d 1088 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Lee 465 So. 2d 806 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Bailey 457 So. 2d 94 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
Thus, she was not under the defendant's control and the 15:438
State v. Thibodeaux 450 So. 2d 1060 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Green 448 So. 2d 782 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
it was held that the presumption does not arise if the witness not presented is equally available to both the state and the defendant.
State v. Palmer 447 So. 2d 1159 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
State v. Tanner 432 So. 2d 1186 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
State v. Simone 428 So. 2d 1226 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
where the prosecutor commented on rebuttal that the defendant had failed to call a witness to the stand to support his position, the court held this was permissible under C.Cr.P.
State v. Chapman 410 So. 2d 689 La. 1982
State v. Elliot 407 So. 2d 659 La. 1981
State v. Thomas 406 So. 2d 1325 La. 1981
State v. Mattheson 407 So. 2d 1150 La. 1981
State v. Miles 402 So. 2d 644 La. 1981
State v. Austin 399 So. 2d 158 La. 1981
State v. Motton 395 So. 2d 1337 La. 1981
State v. Williams 386 So. 2d 1342 La. 1980
State v. Simms, No. 65,582
State v. Zielman 384 So. 2d 359 La. 1980
State v. Tomasetti, supra
State v. Morvant 384 So. 2d 765 La. 1980
State v. Tomasetti, supra ; State v. Mendoza, supra .