DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Lewis, 391 So. 2d 1156.

55 citing documents.

  • State Of Louisiana v. Oderra Benitez Holmes La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2023
  • State Of Louisiana v. David H. Brown (Parish of Lafourche) Convictions Affirmed; Death Sentences Reversed; Case Remanded For … La. 2021
    There is no indication from the record that the nature of any of these relationships were “such that bias or prejudice may be reasonably implied.” (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Prince Record La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
  • State v. Record 266 So. 3d 592 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
  • State v. Massey 91 So. 3d 453 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
  • State of Louisiana v. Leon D. Fussell La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
  • State v. Fussell 941 So. 2d 109 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
  • State v. Juniors 915 So. 2d 291 La. 2005
  • State v. Lattin 870 So. 2d 509 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
  • State v. Jones 744 So. 2d 165 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
  • State v. Wright 741 So. 2d 737 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
  • State v. Ballard 718 So. 2d 521 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
    However, the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that: [S]ervice on a criminal jury by one associated with law enforcement duties must be closely scrutinized and may justify a challenge for cause, although such association does not automatically disqualify a prospective juror.
  • State v. Morris 691 So. 2d 792 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    * * * * * * the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that: [S]ervice on a criminal jury by one associated with law enforcement duties must be closely scrutinized and may justify a challenge for cause, although such association does not automatically disqualify a prospective juror.
  • State v. Jeanlouis 683 So. 2d 1355 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • State v. Ross 674 So. 2d 489 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
    the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that: [S]ervice on a criminal jury by one associated with law enforcement duties must be closely scrutinized and may justify a challenge for cause, although such association does not automatically disqualify a prospective juror.
  • State v. Fairley 645 So. 2d 213 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
  • State v. Davis 626 So. 2d 800 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
  • State v. Lee 625 So. 2d 645 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
  • State v. Jones 623 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    the supreme court stated: [T]he defendant is denied due process of law where circumstances affecting the juror exist which would offer a possible temptation to the average man to forget the burden of proof required to convict the defendant or which might lead him not to hold the balance nice, clear an
  • State v. Ross 623 So. 2d 643 La. 1993
  • State v. Alexander 620 So. 2d 1166 La. 1993
  • Distinguished State v. Alexander 612 So. 2d 262 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
    3571 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1411 (1983)
  • State v. Otis 586 So. 2d 595 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
  • State v. Walker 577 So. 2d 770 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
  • State v. Hall 549 So. 2d 373 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
  • State v. Collins 546 So. 2d 1246 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
  • State v. Mims 524 So. 2d 526 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
  • State v. Collier 522 So. 2d 584 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
  • State v. Williams 524 So. 2d 1221 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
  • State v. Gibson 505 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
  • State v. Burge 498 So. 2d 196 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
    the Supreme Court stated that: The defendant is denied due process of law where circumstances affecting the juror exist which would offer a possible temptation to the average man to forget the burden of proof required to convict the defendant or which might lead him not to hold the balance nice, clear
  • State v. Holbrook 476 So. 2d 582 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
  • State v. Mitchell 475 So. 2d 61 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
    The following cases were reversed where the trial judge denied challenges for cause of prospective jurors: (venireman was law graduate who had worked in district attorney's office as a law clerk and had application to him for a job pending at the time of trial); (La.
  • State v. Jones 474 So. 2d 919 La. 1985
  • State v. Munzy 464 So. 2d 1040 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
  • State v. Capps 461 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Edwards 459 So. 2d 1291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
    the Supreme Court stated that: the defendant is denied due process of law where circumstances affecting the juror exist which would offer a possible temptation to the average man to forget the burden of proof required to convict the defendant or which might lead him not to hold the balance nice, clear
  • State v. Monk 454 So. 2d 421 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Odds 448 So. 2d 868 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
  • State v. Cook 446 So. 2d 824 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
  • State v. Peterson 446 So. 2d 815 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
    State v. McIntyre, supra ; State v. Jones, supra ; c.f.
  • State v. Domino 444 So. 2d 268 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
    the Supreme Court stated that: the defendant is denied due process of law where circumstances affecting the juror exist which would offer a possible temptation to the average man to forget the burden of proof required to convict the defendant or which might lead him not to hold the balance nice, clear
  • State v. Freeze 438 So. 2d 1340 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Gintz 438 So. 2d 1230 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
  • State v. Glaze 439 So. 2d 605 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
  • State v. Smith 437 So. 2d 802 La. 1983
  • State v. Smith 430 So. 2d 31 La. 1983
  • State v. Albert 414 So. 2d 680 La. 1982
    Although a trial court should sustain a challenge for cause despite a prospective juror's professed impartiality if his answers reveal facts from which bias, State v. Monroe, supra , we do not think the trial judge erred in finding that any such implication was dispelled in Mr. White's case by his total performance during his examination.
  • State v. Edwards 412 So. 2d 1029 La. 1982
  • State v. Winn 412 So. 2d 1337 La. 1982