DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Lewis, 385 So. 2d 226.

22 citing documents.

  • State v. Williams 53 So. 3d 669 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    In support, where no indication existed that the marijuana that was offered to the informant would be there when the warrant was executed.
  • State v. McLeod 843 So. 2d 1268 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
  • State v. Young 751 So. 2d 364 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    1 Defendant argues that the affidavit failed to establish the necessary element of probable cause that the contraband or evidence to be seized would not have been disposed of, but would likely remain at the place to be searched at the time of the proposed search
  • State v. Hebert 697 So. 2d 1040 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
  • State v. Stewart 648 So. 2d 15 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
    (citation omitted) (emphasis added).
  • State v. Ginorio 619 So. 2d 790 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
  • State v. Harlan 556 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
  • State v. Lewis 535 So. 2d 943 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
  • State v. Ford 525 So. 2d 649 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
    “Thus, included in the general concept of probable cause is the necessary element of a reasonable belief that the contraband or evidence will not have been disposed of but will remain at the place to be searched at the time of the proposed search.”
  • Distinguished State v. Brown 479 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    relied on by defendant in support of this allegation.
  • State v. Johnson 467 So. 2d 20 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
    are controlling on the present case.
  • State v. Brouillette 465 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
  • State v. Durand 461 So. 2d 1090 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
  • State v. Fleniken 451 So. 2d 1342 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
    (Dennis, J., concurring); cf .
  • State v. Howard 448 So. 2d 713 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Dunn 442 So. 2d 1166 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    concluding]’ that probable cause existed.” for the proposition that the use of the term “quantity” in an affidavit to describe the amount of illegal drugs to be seized has been condemned by the Louisiana Supreme Court as failing to provide a sufficiently detailed factual basis for determining probable cause upon which a search warrant may validly is
  • Distinguished State v. Stroud 438 So. 2d 1172 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
    In support of his argument
  • State v. Trahan 425 So. 2d 1222 La. 1983
  • State v. Jones 404 So. 2d 1192 La. 1981
  • State v. Liner 397 So. 2d 506 La. 1981
  • State v. Cann 392 So. 2d 381 La. 1981
    State v. Boneventure, supra
  • State v. Ogden 391 So. 2d 434 La. 1980