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. Smith, 400 So. 2d 587.

35 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana Versus Wilfred Greenup La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
  • State v. Hatfield 155 So. 3d 572 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    Cyrus , 2011-1175, pp. 20-21, 97 So.3d at 565-66 ; (testimony of officer that he was advised of a shooting incident was not hearsay because it was not offered to prove the truth of matter asserted, but was offered to explain why, having received this information, the officer began an investigation); (deputy’s
  • State v. Augustine 133 So. 3d 148 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
  • State v. Keys 125 So. 3d 19 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    4 Cir. 7/5/12) , -66 , ( ).
  • State v. Skipper 101 So. 3d 537 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    4 Cir. 7/5/12), -66 , ( ).
  • State v. Cyrus 97 So. 3d 554 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
  • State v. Young 764 So. 2d 998 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
  • State v. Thompson 752 So. 2d 293 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
  • State v. Broadway 753 So. 2d 801 La. 1999
    In the present case the prosecutor, argues that testimony by a police officer, as to his action taken in response to a person's out-of-court statement, is admissible, not to prove the truth of the out-of-court statement, but to explain the sequence of events leading to the arrest of the defendant from the viewpoint of the investigating
  • State v. Smith 710 So. 2d 1187 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
    State v. Edwards, supra .
  • State v. Hawkins 688 So. 2d 473 La. 1997
  • State v. Green 683 So. 2d 1292 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
  • State v. Tart 672 So. 2d 116 La. 1996
    -594 (La.1981) (where SIR revealed discrepancies on two fact issues between trial testimony and statements obtained for SIR).
  • State v. Bordenave 660 So. 2d 1207 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
  • State v. Soler 636 So. 2d 1069 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
    State v. Edwards, supra.
  • State v. Williams 591 So. 2d 404 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
    2011 , 72 L.Ed.2d 467 (1981)
  • State v. Williams 591 So. 2d 404 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    2011 , 72 L.Ed.2d 467 (1981)
  • State v. Grillette 588 So. 2d 1338 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
    for the proposition that photographs are inadmissible when they do not accurately depict the scene as it existed at the time of the crime.
  • State v. Wille 559 So. 2d 1321 La. 1990
    In the present case the prosecutor, argues that testimony by a police officer, as to his action taken in response to a person's out-of-court statement, is admissible, not to prove the truth of the out-of-court statement, but to explain the sequence of events leading to the arrest of the defendant from the viewpoint of the investigating office
  • State v. Dickerson 538 So. 2d 1063 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
  • State v. Tassin 536 So. 2d 402 La. 1988
    affirmed the conviction of Reginald Smith, who randomly shot at a group of boys in a lounge parking lot.
  • State v. Weiland 505 So. 2d 702 La. 1987
  • State v. Ford 489 So. 2d 1250 La. 1986
    939 , 83 L.Ed.2d 952 (1985)
  • State v. Carmouche 480 So. 2d 728 La. 1985
    art. 17 (1966); Supreme Court Rule XXVIII § 5 (1977); State v. Fuller St.
  • State v. Williams 480 So. 2d 721 La. 1985
  • State v. Orlando 456 So. 2d 1021 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Fuller 454 So. 2d 119 La. 1984
    [6] we affirmed defendant's conviction, but remanded to the trial court under Supreme Court Rule XXVIII, § 5, for development of additional facts (not introduced into evidence at the trial, but contained in the sentence investigation report of the probation and parole agent) and for an initial determination by
  • State v. Watson 449 So. 2d 1321 La. 1984
    State v. Edwards, supra.
  • State v. Buchanan 439 So. 2d 576 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    the defendant argued that a new trial should have been granted by the trial court on the basis of insufficiency of evidence since no one actually saw the defendant shoot the victim.
  • State v. Smith 431 So. 2d 111 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Lindsey 428 So. 2d 420 La. 1983
    for argument); (a companion to Sawyer )
  • State v. Toussaint 429 So. 2d 206 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Leach 425 So. 2d 1232 La. 1983
  • State v. Taylor 422 So. 2d 109 La. 1982
    Finally, the defendant was sentenced to death upon the finding that he created a risk of death or great bodily harm to more than one person by randomly shooting at a group of youths.
  • State v. Sawyer 422 So. 2d 95 La. 1982