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. Simmons, 390 So. 2d 1317.

31 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Antonio Merquis Harris La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
    When this court in [State v.] Simmons, [ (La.
  • State v. Harris 274 So. 3d 178 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    When this court in [ State v. ] Simmons , [ (La.
  • State v. Lacaze 208 So. 3d 856 La. 2016
    The district court determined that Mr. Settle was a “badge-wearing law enforcement officer” who, but for his failure to respond, would have been subject to a meritorious challenge for cause, (La.
  • State v. Aguillard 158 So. 3d 976 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    In State v. Ballard, supra, to the extent that it held that police officers actively engaged in law enforcement are incompetent criminal jurors.
  • State v. Boyd 104 So. 3d 642 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    See State v. Ballard, 98-2198 (La.10/19/99)
  • State v. Weary 931 So. 2d 297 La. 2006
    In State v. Ballard, 98-2198 (La.10/19/99), , this Court unanimously overruled State v. Simmons, [2] holding that if a law enforcement officer indicated during voir dire that he could be an impartial juror, the trial court has the discretion to determine whether challenge for cause is warranted.
  • State v. Scott 921 So. 2d 904 La. 2006
    In State v. Ballard, 98-2198 (La.10/19/99), , and held that if a law enforcement officer indicates during voir dire that he could be an impartial juror, the trial court has the discretion to determine whether or not a cause challenge is warranted.
  • State of Louisiana v. James R. Skipper La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    Defense counsel then challenged Trooper Davis for cause, citing, inter alia, in which the supreme court determined that “an actively employed criminal deputy sheriff is not a competent criminal juror.” During a brief recess, the trial judge reviewed the Louisiana Supreme Court’s decision in State v. LaCaze, 99-0584 (La.
  • State v. Skipper 861 So. 2d 796 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    Defense counsel then challenged Trooper Davis for cause, citing, inter alia, in which the supreme court determined that “an actively employed criminal deputy sheriff is not a competent criminal juror.” During a brief recess, the trial judge reviewed the Louisiana Supreme Court’s decision in State v. LaCaze, 99-0584 (La.1/25/02), , cert.
  • State v. Jones 862 So. 2d 266 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    State v. Ballard, 98-2198 (La.10/19/99)
  • State v. Deruise 802 So. 2d 1224 La. 2001
    In State v. Ballard, 98-2198 (La.10/19/99), , and held that Louisiana courts should no longer presume that police officers actively engaged in law enforcement are incompetent criminal jurors.
  • State v. LaCaze 759 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
  • State v. Ballard 747 So. 2d 1077 La. 1999
    On appeal, the majority of the en banc panel of the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, upheld the trial court's ruling, which held: "an actively employed criminal deputy sheriff is not a competent criminal juror."
  • State v. Wright 741 So. 2d 737 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    the Louisiana Supreme |7Court examined whether an actively employed law enforcement officer could be a fair and impartial juror.
  • State v. Rhodes 722 So. 2d 1078 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
    2nd Cir.1985) (reserve police officer working with Monroe City Police Department at time of defendant's investigation by same department); (actively employed criminal deputy investigator); (La.
  • State v. Ballard 718 So. 2d 521 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
    to reverse the trial judge's denial of defendant's challenge of Brown for cause, reasoning that because Brown was an actively employed deputy sheriff, the failure of the trial court to dismiss him for cause was error.
  • State v. Brown 715 So. 2d 566 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
  • State v. Fox 690 So. 2d 246 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
  • State v. Gaines 688 So. 2d 679 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
  • State v. Robinson 684 So. 2d 63 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • Usner v. Strobach 591 So. 2d 713 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    (Citations omitted) Thus, that an actively employed criminal deputy sheriff is not a competent criminal juror.
  • State v. Henderson 566 So. 2d 1098 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
  • State v. Mims 524 So. 2d 526 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
  • State v. Vanderpool 493 So. 2d 574 La. 1986
  • State v. Mitchell 475 So. 2d 61 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
    the Supreme Court held that notwithstanding a juror's assertions of impartiality, one who has a graduate degree in law enforcement, is employed by the sheriff's office, and is working closely with the district attorney's office, must be affected by that employment relationship to such an extent that it is r
  • State v. Capps 461 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Simmons 422 So. 2d 138 La. 1982
  • State v. Edwards 412 So. 2d 1029 La. 1982
  • State v. Winn 412 So. 2d 1337 La. 1982
  • State v. Chapman 410 So. 2d 689 La. 1982
  • State v. Sugar 408 So. 2d 1329 La. 1982