Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Bland, 419 So. 2d 1227.

61 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Jamal Christopher Lacon La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
State of Louisiana v. Raven Lamar Wiltz La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
State v. Granier 178 So. 3d 1106 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Tatten 116 So. 3d 843 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
In State v. Bland, [ ] supra, an habitual offender case, we found the State had affirmatively proven the defendant was fully informed of and voluntarily waived his three Boykin rights where the State introduced a minute entry which stated “the Court inquired of the defendant if he understood that by entering this plea he as [sic
State v. Turner 32 So. 3d 277 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
a habitual offender case, the Louisiana Supreme Court found a minute entry evidencing advisement of Boykin rights could be sufficient proof of a prior guilty plea.
State of Louisiana v. Archie Louis Carter, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
State v. Carter 12 So. 3d 1091 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. James 938 So. 2d 1191 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
In Shelton, supra, where that court found that a minute entry evidencing advisement of Boykin rights could be sufficient proof of a prior guilty plea.
State v. Davis 848 So. 2d 557 La. 2003
State v. Bright, 98-0398, p. 24 (La.4/11/00), ; -07 (La.1984); n. 3 (La.1982)
State v. Flagg 792 So. 2d 133 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
State v. Baudier 789 So. 2d 696 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
State v. Jason 779 So. 2d 865 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
the minute entry alone was sufficient to show that the defendant was informed of his rights where the minute entry itemized those rights.
State v. Casse 772 So. 2d 801 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
State v. Mayo 770 So. 2d 462 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
the minute entry alone was sufficient to show that the defendant was informed of his rights where the minute entry itemized those rights.
State v. Boudreaux 756 So. 2d 505 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
State v. Brady 748 So. 2d 1280 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Whiddon 741 So. 2d 797 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
State v. Pertuit 734 So. 2d 144 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
State v. Ursin 720 So. 2d 1248 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
State v. Authement 713 So. 2d 1226 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
State v. Dumas 703 So. 2d 112 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
State v. Lott 688 So. 2d 608 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
State v. Deroche 674 So. 2d 291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Fritcher 672 So. 2d 295 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Dejean 694 So. 2d 284 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
State v. Delanoix 637 So. 2d 515 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. Probst 623 So. 2d 79 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. Shelton 621 So. 2d 769 La. 1993
this court stated "the state may affirmatively prove that the defendant ...
State v. Morris 619 So. 2d 184 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Moten 619 So. 2d 683 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
State v. Fontenot 618 So. 2d 915 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
("continuous criminal transaction"); ("so closely connected that the indictment or information as to the instant crime is deemed to carry with it notice as to the other crime as well") (quoting G. Pugh & J. McClelland, Evidence, 35 La.L.Rev.
State v. Thornton 599 So. 2d 919 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
where the court found that when the defendant did not challenge the accuracy of the minute entry and a full Boykinization was reflected in the minute entry, the minute entry was sufficient proof that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his Boykin rights.
State v. Bridges 610 So. 2d 827 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
the Supreme Court found that a minute entry indicating that a full Boykin colloquy took place was sufficient to show a knowing and voluntary waiver of rights as to the prior conviction.
State v. Cook 598 So. 2d 423 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
State v. Dawson 560 So. 2d 593 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Longo 560 So. 2d 530 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Rogers 555 So. 2d 500 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Lambert 550 So. 2d 847 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
Finally, the male defendant performed oral sex on a non-consenting 12-year-old female, and his conviction for aggravated crime against nature was affirmed.
State v. Thomas 540 So. 2d 1150 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Verrett 536 So. 2d 808 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Williams 532 So. 2d 1190 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
State v. Wilkerson 533 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Carson 527 So. 2d 1018 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Hudnall 522 So. 2d 616 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
State v. Battista 517 So. 2d 1096 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
State v. Alexander 503 So. 2d 782 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
State v. Ourso 502 So. 2d 246 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
State v. Williams 483 So. 2d 626 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
State v. Junegain 478 So. 2d 542 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985
1709 , 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969)
State v. Smith 477 So. 2d 875 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1985