DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Graham, 422 So. 2d 123.

184 citing documents.

  • State v. M.M. 802 So. 2d 43 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
  • State v. Lovick 788 So. 2d 565 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    appeal dismissed, Graham v. Louisiana, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Marston 780 So. 2d 1058 La. 2001
  • State v. Harris 781 So. 2d 73 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    1558 , 103 L.Ed.2d 860 (1989)
  • State v. Ditcharo 739 So. 2d 957 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    -130 (La.1982), appeal dismissed, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Snyder 750 So. 2d 832 La. 1999
    Cf. State v. Strickland, 94-0025, p. 51 (La.11/1/96), (harmless errors, however numerous, do not aggregate to reach the level of reversible error); State v. Taylor, 93-2201 (La.2/28/96), (unpub'd appx.); State v. Tart, 93-0772 (La.2/9/96), ; ( (La.
  • State v. Davis 732 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
    1487 , 67 L.Ed.2d 618 (1981); appeal dismissed, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Adams 715 So. 2d 118 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
  • State v. Butler 714 So. 2d 877 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
    State v. Sanders, supra ; State v. Morris, supra .
  • State v. Barber 708 So. 2d 1054 La. 1998
    -132 (La.1982); (La.App.
  • State v. Douglas 707 So. 2d 512 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
    the court does not determine whether another possible hypothesis has been suggested by defendant which could explain the events in an exculpatory fashion.
  • State v. Ortiz 701 So. 2d 922 La. 1997
  • State v. Pendelton 696 So. 2d 144 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
    appeal dismissed, Graham v. Louisiana, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Seals 684 So. 2d 368 La. 1996
  • State v. Horne 679 So. 2d 953 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
  • State v. Matthews 679 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
    -37 (La.1982), appeal dismissed, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Nelson 674 So. 2d 329 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • State v. Viree 670 So. 2d 733 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
  • State v. Harper 660 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
    1487 , 67 L.Ed.2d 618 (1981); appeal dismissed, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Scales 655 So. 2d 1326 La. 1995
  • State v. Walker 654 So. 2d 451 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
  • State v. Linson 654 So. 2d 440 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
  • State v. Touchet 642 So. 2d 1213 La. 1994
    citing La.Code Crim.Proc.
  • State v. Gaudet 638 So. 2d 1216 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
    the court does not determine whether another possible hypothesis has been suggested by defendant which could explain the events in an exculpatory fashion.
  • State v. Galliano 639 So. 2d 440 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
    appeal dismissed, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Davis 634 So. 2d 1168 La. 1994
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State v. Bibb 626 So. 2d 913 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1993
    *925 Furthermore, the Louisiana Supreme Court noted a distinction in the related rule concerning juror misconduct.
  • State v. Tyler 619 So. 2d 807 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
  • State v. Williams 610 So. 2d 991 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
    1558 , 103 L.Ed.2d 860 (1989); appeal dismissed, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Major 604 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
    the court does not determine whether another possible hypothesis has been suggested by defendant which could explain the events in an exculpatory fashion.
  • State v. Harris 597 So. 2d 163 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
    State v. Sanders, supra ; State v. Morris, supra .
  • State v. Velez 588 So. 2d 116 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
  • State v. Lott 574 So. 2d 417 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
  • State v. Thompson 578 So. 2d 1151 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    the court does not determine whether another possible hypothesis has been suggested by defendant which could explain the events in an exculpatory fashion.
  • State v. Duncan 563 So. 2d 1269 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
    appeal dismissed, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Jacobs 558 So. 2d 1220 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
  • State v. Augustine 555 So. 2d 1331 La. 1990
    3593 , 82 L.Ed.2d 889 (1984); cert.
  • State v. Williams 554 So. 2d 141 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
  • State v. Johnson 553 So. 2d 865 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    appeal dismissed, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Duplissey 550 So. 2d 590 La. 1989
    Annotation, Communications between Court Officials or Attendants and Jurors in Criminal Trial as Ground for Mistrial or Reversal—Post-Parker Cases, 35 ALR 4th 890 , § 3 (1985); Annotation, Prejudicial Effect, in Criminal Case, of Communication between Court Officials or Attendants and Jurors, 41 ALR 2nd 227
  • State v. Wren 549 So. 2d 889 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
    Defendant relies on this lack of evidence (who was driving when) to premise his argument that the evidence otherwise is legally insufficient
  • State v. Brown 546 So. 2d 1265 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
    art. 15:470; -132 (La.1982).
  • State v. Isaac 544 So. 2d 531 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1989
  • State v. Barbee 543 So. 2d 530 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
    appeal dismissed, Graham v. Louisiana, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Sanders 539 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
  • State v. Stewart 530 So. 2d 1263 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
  • Cosie v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Ins. Co. 527 So. 2d 1105 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
    Canon 3(A)(4); Conner v. Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, supra .
  • State v. Richard 525 So. 2d 1097 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1988
  • State v. Mussall 523 So. 2d 1305 La. 1988
    1986); -475 (La.1983); (citing cases); -1231 (La.1983); appeal dismissed, Graham v. Louisiana, 461 U.S. 950 , 103 S.Ct.
  • State v. Copeland 530 So. 2d 526 La. 1988