Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Neslo, 433 So. 2d 73.

120 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Terrence Armstrong A/K/A Terrance Armstrong A/K/A Dugga La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
–82 (La.1983), the supreme court addressed a similar claim as follows: By this assignment of error, defendant complains that the trial court erred in allowing the assistant district attorney to amend the first degree murder indictment immediately prior to trial.
State of Louisiana v. Demarious Hicks La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
In re State in Interest of J.S. 268 So. 3d 311 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
205 , 107 L.Ed.2d 159 (1989) ; , 87 (La.
State v. Doucette 243 So. 3d 704 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Neslo , ; State v. Tate , (La.App.
State v. Brazell 245 So. 3d 15 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
art. 487 ; Reel , 10-1737, p. 10 , 126 So.3d at 514 (citing State v. Neslo , (La.
State v. Carter 167 So. 3d 970 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Wilson 167 So. 3d 903 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
-78 (La.1983) (witnesses’ positive identification of the defendant from a physical line-up, after ^viewing several photographic lineups where only the defendant’s photograph was repeated, was not found to be suggestive); State v. Higgins, 01-368 (La.App.
State v. Moore 134 So. 3d 1265 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
State of Louisiana v. Brent Authorlee La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Authorlee 111 So. 3d 1170 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State of Louisiana v. Brenda Gail Rains La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
205, 107 L.Ed.2d 159 (1989); (both decided under former LSA-R.S.
State v. Rains 101 So. 3d 593 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
205 , 107 L.Ed.2d 159 (1989); (both decided under former LSA-R.S.
State of Louisiana v. Jonathan L.citizen La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Reel 126 So. 3d 506 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Higginbotham 122 So. 3d 1 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
State v. Robinson 87 So. 3d 881 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2011
2 Cir.1984), writ denied, -83 (La.1983)
State of Louisiana v. Fred Ballard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Campbell 983 So. 2d 810 La. 2008
State v. Leonard 932 So. 2d 660 La. 2006
(both decided under former La.
State of Louisiana v. Nicholas Demond Pitree La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. Pitree 930 So. 2d 265 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. Moliere 931 So. 2d 1100 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
State of Louisiana v. Robert S. Willis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
3/25/94), State v. Trosclair, 57 cert.
State v. Willis 915 So. 2d 365 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
2 Cir.1993), writ denied, 93-3194 (La.3/25/94), ; cert.
State v. Manning 885 So. 2d 1044 La. 2004
State of Louisiana v. Cedric Daniels La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
only the defendant appeared in both a second photographic lineup and a live lineup.
State v. Daniels 873 So. 2d 822 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
State v. Morehead 870 So. 2d 428 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
205 , 107 L.Ed.2d 159 (1989); (both decided under former LSA-R.S.
State v. Lee 868 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
State v. Evans 864 So. 2d 682 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Sanborn 831 So. 2d 320 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
State v. Hayes, 98-485, p. 9 (La.App.
State v. Higgins 800 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
For example, -78 (La.1983), witnesses positively identified defendant from a physical lineup after viewing several photographic lineups in which only the defendant's photograph was repeated.
State v. Camese 791 So. 2d 173 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: In reviewing an identification procedure, the court must determine whether the procedure was so unnecessarily suggestive and so conducive to an irreparable mistaken identification that the defendant was denied due process of law.
State v. Short 769 So. 2d 823 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
State v. Freeman 770 So. 2d 482 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
-83 (La.1983) (emphasis added), the supreme court addressed the issue of whether a statement was inculpatory: This court has held that a confession is a statement which admits the commission of a crime, while the inculpatory statement admits a fact, circumstances, or involvement which tend to establish guilt or fro
State v. Bright 776 So. 2d 1134 La. 2000
State v. Thibodeaux 750 So. 2d 916 La. 1999
State v. Koon 730 So. 2d 503 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Hayes 726 So. 2d 39 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
State v. Clark 670 So. 2d 624 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Johnson 664 So. 2d 94 La. 1995
205 , 107 L.Ed.2d 159 (1989); (both decided under former LSA-R.S.
State v. Scales 655 So. 2d 1326 La. 1995
State v. Dorsey 654 So. 2d 1094 La. 1995
State v. McLemore 640 So. 2d 847 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
State v. Johnson 631 So. 2d 658 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
A review of the cited cases of Miller, Woolridge, shows that the courts never said more than "certified copies of defendant's prior conviction," and thus never specified if bills of information along with court minutes were admissible.
State v. Taylor 621 So. 2d 141 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Bancroft 620 So. 2d 482 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. Griffin 618 So. 2d 680 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Perow 616 So. 2d 1336 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Dotson 598 So. 2d 1220 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992