Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Rogers, 419 So. 2d 840.

56 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Kenneth Augustine La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. Trevonte Lamarque Talbert La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2021
2 Cir. 10/13/95), the court, in addressing the trial court’s role relative to issues of a defendant’s capacity to proceed, stated the following: “Due process and our statutory law require that the issue of the defendant’s mental capacity to proceed shall be determined by the court.” [State v.] Rogers, [ (La.
State of Louisiana v. Wayne Jackson La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
State v. Cretian 238 So. 3d 473 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
836 , 15 L.Ed.2d 815 (1966)
State of Louisiana v. Darrin Kashy Duhon -Aka- Darrin Duhon La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
2 Cir. 10/13/95), the court, in addressing the trial court’s role relative to issues of a defendant’s capacity to proceed, stated the following: “Due process and our statutory law require that the issue of the defendant’s mental capacity to proceed shall be determined by the court.” [State v.] Rogers, [ (La.
State v. Duhon 224 So. 3d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
App. 2 Cir. 10/13/95), , the court, in addressing the trial court’s role relative to issues of a defendant’s capacity to proceed, stated the following: “Due process and our statutory law require that the issue of the defendant’s mental capacity to proceed shall be determined by the court.” [State v.] Rogers, [ (La.
State of Louisiana v. Robert Leroy McCoy 218 So. 3d 535 La. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Steffon McCurley La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
State v. McCurley 165 So. 3d 1232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State of Louisiana v. Harold Lee Julien, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
In Carney, 663 So.2d at 473, the second circuit stated: “Due process and our statutory law require that the issue of the defendant’s mental capacity to proceed shall be determined by the court.” [State v.] Rogers, [].
State v. Julien 139 So. 3d 1152 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
In Carney, 663 So.2d at 473 , the second circuit stated: “Due process and our statutory law require that the issue of the defendant’s mental capacity to proceed shall be determined by the court.” [State v.] Rogers, [ ].
State v. Cummings 79 So. 3d 386 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Holmes 5 So. 3d 42 La. 2008
State v. Nomey, 92-1631 (La.1/19/93), , ( (La.
State v. Gibson 993 So. 2d 1193 La. 2008
641-649.1; (citing Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 , 95 S.Ct.
State v. Camper 996 So. 2d 571 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
836 , 15 L.Ed.2d 815 (1966)
State v. Anderson 996 So. 2d 973 La. 2008
State v. Campbell 983 So. 2d 810 La. 2008
Nomey, 613 So.2d at 161 (); see also Pate, 383 U.S. at 386 , 86 S.Ct.
State v. Ford 930 So. 2d 138 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
| ^Louisiana's statutory scheme for detecting mental incapacity “jealously guards a defendant’s right to a fair trial.” State v. Nomey, 92-1631 (La.1/19/93), ().
State v. Snyder 874 So. 2d 739 La. 2004
State v. Carmouche 872 So. 2d 1020 La. 2003
Nomey, 613 So.2d at 161 (); see also Pate, 383 U.S. at 386 , 86 S.Ct.
State v. Orange 845 So. 2d 570 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
State v. Lee 834 So. 2d 536 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
836 , 15 L.Ed.2d 815 (1966)
State Ex Rel. Seals v. State 831 So. 2d 828 La. 2002
836 , 15 L.Ed.2d 815 (1966)
State v. Moore 827 So. 2d 647 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
State v. Bridgewater 823 So. 2d 877 La. 2002
State v. Carter 814 So. 2d 710 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
2nd Cir.10/13/95), La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Lopes 805 So. 2d 124 La. 2001
State v. Perkins 759 So. 2d 334 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
836 , 15 L.Ed.2d 815 (1966)
State v. Howard 751 So. 2d 783 La. 1999
641-649.1; citing Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 , 95 S.Ct.
State v. Castleberry 758 So. 2d 749 La. 1999
State v. Gaines 701 So. 2d 688 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
State v. Kendrick 699 So. 2d 424 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
State v. Sepulvado 672 So. 2d 158 La. 1996
State v. Billiot 672 So. 2d 361 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Carney 663 So. 2d 470 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
State v. Clark 638 So. 2d 225 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
State v. Green 632 So. 2d 1187 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
State v. Nomey 613 So. 2d 157 La. 1993
836 , 15 L.Ed.2d 815 (1966); (La.
State v. Watson 609 So. 2d 1198 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Henderson 607 So. 2d 725 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
State v. Labom 602 So. 2d 35 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Mitchell 580 So. 2d 1006 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
State v. Goins 568 So. 2d 231 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
State v. Gurley 565 So. 2d 1055 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
the Supreme Court noted that such lay witness testimony concerning a previous case "did not result from objective expert analysis of the defendant's present mental capacity to stand trial ...
State v. Brooks 541 So. 2d 801 La. 1989
State v. Beauchamp 510 So. 2d 22 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
State v. Perry 502 So. 2d 543 La. 1986
State v. Lowenfield 495 So. 2d 1245 La. 1986
State v. Freeman 482 So. 2d 1078 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
This cardinal principle permits the court to receive the aid of expert medical testimony ...”
State v. Harris 478 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985