Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Lewis, 416 So. 2d 921.

41 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Devin R. Ned La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2025
Ocmand v. Lubrano 78 So. 3d 783 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
n. 1 (La.1982); Uniform Rules — Courts of Appeal, Rule 2-12.4.
State v. Harris 812 So. 2d 612 La. 2002
("For purposes of this article, the term `inculpatory statements' refers to defendant's out of court admission made after a crime has taken place which implicates defendant in its commission....
State v. Davis 732 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
Rule 2, Section 12.4, Uniform Rules of the Courts of Appeal.
State v. Butler 714 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
the court stated that the term "inculpatory statement" refers to the defendant's out of court admission made after a crime has taken place which implicates the defendant in its commission.
State v. Rubin 649 So. 2d 1240 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
appeal after remand, (La.App.
State ex rel. Lewis v. Nineteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge 604 So. 2d 1012 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
appeal after remand, (La.App.
State v. Brown 558 So. 2d 1226 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. White 552 So. 2d 553 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Smith 539 So. 2d 993 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Goldsby 519 So. 2d 298 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
State v. Jenkins 508 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
State v. Zeno 499 So. 2d 1342 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
appeal after remand, (La.App.
State v. Piazza 496 So. 2d 1229 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
State v. Lewis, supra [ ].
State v. Piazza 496 So. 2d 1229 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1986
State v. Lewis, supra [ (La.
State v. Clark 492 So. 2d 862 La. 1986
State v. Scott 490 So. 2d 472 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
While we have held that there is no need for a contemporaneous objection for the issue of excessive sentence to be raised upon appeal, (La.
State v. Frelix 484 So. 2d 936 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
see also State v. Carter, supra .
State v. Doolittle 482 So. 2d 896 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
135 , 66 L.Ed.2d 58 (1984)
State v. Robinson 480 So. 2d 329 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Buie 477 So. 2d 157 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Jones 474 So. 2d 919 La. 1985
State v. Childs 466 So. 2d 1363 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
: Defendant was charged with forcible rape, aggravated burglary, and aggravated crime against nature.
State v. Smith 466 So. 2d 1343 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1985
the Louisiana Supreme Court found that hearsay testimony relating to an admission by the defendant is admissible under a widely recognized exception to the hearsay rule.
State v. Williams 464 So. 2d 443 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
art. 768, “the term ‘inculpatory statement’ refers to defendant’s out of court admission made after a crime has taken place which implicates defendant in its commission.” (La.App.
State v. Ring 461 So. 2d 1162 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1984
State v. Alexander 457 So. 2d 867 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Rule 2, Section 12.4, Uniform Rules of the Courts of Appeal.
State v. Williams 454 So. 2d 295 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
While we have held that there is no need for a contemporaneous objection for the issue of excessive sentence to be raised upon appeal, we have been careful to limit this rule to prevent the defendant from being relieved of all obligations for objection in connection with sentence review.
Talley v. Maggio 451 So. 2d 1358 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1984
State v. DeBoue 451 So. 2d 189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Berthelot 449 So. 2d 692 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
Recently, consecutive sentences were vacated and the case remanded for failure to adequately comply with Article 894.1.
State v. Beridon 449 So. 2d 2 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
the court held that the 768 notice was not applicable to an inculpatory statement made by defendant one hour before the crimes took place.
State v. Bridges 444 So. 2d 721 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1984
State v. Lathers 444 So. 2d 96 La. 1983
State v. Wade 442 So. 2d 681 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
State v. Fruge 438 So. 2d 1337 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
State v. Alexander 437 So. 2d 991 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
Rule 2, Section 12.4, Uniform Rules of the Courts of Appeal.
State v. Junak 436 So. 2d 1312 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1983
State v. Lewis 430 So. 2d 1286 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
State v. Telsee 425 So. 2d 1251 La. 1983
State v. Oubichon 422 So. 2d 1140 La. 1982
While we have held that there is no need for a contemporaneous objection for the issue of excessive sentence to be raised upon appeal, we have been careful to limit this rule to prevent the defendant from being relieved of all obligations for objection in connection with sentence review.