Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Schaffner, 398 So. 2d 1032.

36 citing documents.

State v. McBride 239 So. 3d 383 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
Defendant presents no authoritative support for this assertion, although in his second assignment of error, discussed below, he cites State v. Schaffner , , 1035 (La.
State of Louisiana v. Daniel Brandon Prince -Aka- Daniel B. Prince La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
Testimony is materially corroborated “if there is evidence that confirms material points in an accomplice’s tale, and confirms Defendant’s identity and some relationship to the situation.” State v. Castleberry, supra.
State v. Prince 211 So. 3d 481 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Testimony is materially corroborated “if there is evidence that confirms material points in an accomplice’s tale, and confirms Defendant’s identity and some relationship to the situation.” State v. Castleberry, supra.
State of Louisiana v. Debbie E. Adams AKA Debbie Adams La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Ronald Pete La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
The footnote to this passage elaborates: See also: State v. Howard, 98-0064 (La.4/23/99), where it was held that when the state‟s case turns upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, the trial judge should instruct the jury to treat such testimony with great caution.
State v. Pete 134 So. 3d 196 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
The footnote to this passage elaborates: See also: State v. Howard, 98-0064 (La.4/23/99), , where it was held that when the state’s case turns upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, the trial judge should instruct the jury to treat such testimony with great caution.
State of Louisiana v. Eric John Anderson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Anderson 116 So. 3d 1045 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
220 , 145 L;Ed.2d 185 (1999) ().
State of Louisiana v. Jonathan Edward Boyer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
(citing U.S. v. Lee, 506 F.2d 111 (D.C.Cir.1974); U.S. v. Clark, 480 F.2d 1249 (5th Cir. (Ga.)
State v. Boyer 56 So. 3d 1119 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Declouet 52 So. 3d 89 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
Stewart , 08-1265 at 14, 15 So.3d at 285 ().
State v. Hollins 15 So. 3d 69 La. 2009
(citing U.S. v. Lee, 506 F.2d 111 (D.C.Cir.1974); 3 U.S. v. Clark, 480 F.2d 51249 (5th Cir.(Ga.)
State v. Stewart 15 So. 3d 276 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Smith, 888 So.2d at 289 , citing
State of Louisiana v. Clyde Milton Jones La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
An accomplice’s testimony is materially corroborated “if there is evidence that confirms material points in an accomplice’s tale, and confirms the defendant’s identity and some relationship to the situation.” Castleberry, 98-1388 at p. 13, 758 So.2d at 761 ().
State v. Jones 999 So. 2d 239 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
An accomplice’s testimony is materially corroborated “if there is evidence that confirms material points in an accomplice’s *247 tale, and confirms the defendant’s identity and some relationship to the situation.” Castleberry , 98-1388 at p. 13, 758 So.2d at 761 ().
State v. Arnold 970 So. 2d 1067 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
220 , 145 L.Ed.2d 185 (1999) (); Hughes , XXXX-XXXX at p. 6, 943 So.2d at 1051 .
State of Louisiana v. Charles Hatch La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
An accomplice’s testimony is materially corroborated “if there is evidence that confirms material points in an accomplice’s tale, and confirms the defendant’s identity and some relationship to the situation.” Castleberry, 98-1388 at p. 13, 758 So.2d at 761 ().
State v. Hatch 964 So. 2d 394 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
Castleberry , 98-1388 at p. 13, 758 So.2d at 761 ().
State of Louisiana v. Nathan Stringer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
The footnote to this passage elaborates: See also: State v. Howard, 98-0064 (La.4/23/99), where it was held that when the state's case turns upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, the trial judge should instruct the jury to treat such testimony with great caution.
State v. Stringer 949 So. 2d 464 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
The footnote to this passage elaborates: See also: State v. Howard, 98-0064 (La.4/23/99), , where it was held that when the state's case turns upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, the trial judge should instruct the jury to treat such testimony with great caution.
State v. Hughes 943 So. 2d 1047 La. 2006
Castleberry , 98-1388 at p. 13, 758 So.2d at 761 ().
State v. Fasola 901 So. 2d 533 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
[22] State v. Smith, supra
State v. Divers 889 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
State v. Castleberry, supra.
State v. Smith 888 So. 2d 280 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
State v. Rabun 880 So. 2d 184 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
State v. Dunn, 30,560 (La.App.2d Cir.02/25/98), .
State of Louisiana v. John R. Chesson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Testimony is materially corroborated “if there is evidence that confirms material points in an accomplice's tale, and confirms the defendant's identity and some relationship to the situation.” citing United States v. Lee, 506 F.2d 111 (D.C.Cir.1974), cert.
State v. Chesson 856 So. 2d 166 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
citing United States v. Lee, 506 F.2d 111 (D.C.Cir.1974), cert.
State v. Zeno 811 So. 2d 1222 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
The footnote to this | mpassage elaborates: See also: State v. Howard, 98-0064 (La.4/23/99), , where it was held that when the state’s case turns upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, the trial judge should instruct the jury to treat such testimony with great caution.
State v. Addison 788 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
[4] See also: State v. Howard, 98-0064 (La.4/23/99), , (La.
State v. McCullough 774 So. 2d 1105 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
Prior to closing arguments, as support for using the foregoing charges.
State v. Howard 751 So. 2d 783 La. 1999
in urging that where the state's case turns upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, the trial judge should instruct the jury to treat such testimony with great caution.
State v. Castleberry 758 So. 2d 749 La. 1999
State v. Styles 692 So. 2d 1222 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
State v. Owens 521 So. 2d 704 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Wilkerson 448 So. 2d 1355 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984
State v. Swartz 444 So. 2d 660 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983