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. Jackson, 454 So. 2d 116.

53 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Alexander D. Kirby La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
  • State of Louisiana Versus C. T. La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2019
    Mitchell, 779 So.2d at 701; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284; (La.
  • State v. Alridge 249 So. 3d 260 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    App. 4 Cir. 1989) ( ), this Court explained that "an indirect reference to the defendant's failure to take the stand is reversible only when the prosecutor intended to emphasize it."
  • State of Louisiana v. Marlon Frank Thomas La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. Thomas 217 So. 3d 651 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822 ; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. Monroe 198 So. 3d 259 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    at pp. 4-5, 779 So.2d at 701 ( ).
  • State v. Simms 143 So. 3d 1258 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    at pp. 4-5, 779 So.2d at 701 ( ).
  • State v. Robinson 79 So. 3d 1270 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    State v. Fullilove, supra
  • State of Louisiana v. Paxton Jules Trahan La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. Trahan 61 So. 3d 794 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822 ; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State of Louisiana v. Jonathan Edward Boyer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. Boyer 56 So. 3d 1119 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822 ; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State of Louisiana v. Kendall Paul Davis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. Davis 36 So. 3d 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822 ; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. Woodfork 981 So. 2d 717 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
    State v. Brown, 96-0954 (La.App.
  • State v. Packnett 892 So. 2d 615 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
  • State v. Small 850 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822 ; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. White 850 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822 ; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. Wright 796 So. 2d 850 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822 ; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. Mitchell 779 So. 2d 698 La. 2001
    Johnson, 541 So.2d at 822 ; Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284
  • State v. Hampton 750 So. 2d 867 La. 1999
  • State v. Arvie 709 So. 2d 810 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
  • State v. Brown 692 So. 2d 735 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
    the Supreme Court, even though they found no impermissible statement under C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Timon 683 So. 2d 315 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
  • State v. Bowman 677 So. 2d 1094 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
  • State v. Hattaway 674 So. 2d 380 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
  • State v. Gatch 669 So. 2d 676 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
  • State v. Thornton 671 So. 2d 481 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
  • State v. Rhodes 657 So. 2d 1373 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
    the Supreme Court said at page 118: "A statement that the state's evidence is uncontradicted is not necessarily a prohibited comment on defendant's failure to testify...
  • State v. Bourque 622 So. 2d 198 La. 1993
  • State v. Clay 612 So. 2d 266 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
    the Supreme Court, even though they found no impermissible statement under C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Watts 596 So. 2d 306 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
  • State v. Moser 588 So. 2d 1243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    [2] In both Johnson, 541 So.2d at 823 , the Louisiana Supreme Court seemingly applied a harmless error analysis.
  • State v. Lamark 584 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
    See State v. Johnson, 541 So.2d at 823 , (La.
  • State v. Fleming 574 So. 2d 486 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
  • State v. Shepherd 566 So. 2d 1127 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
  • State v. Allen 560 So. 2d 638 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
  • State v. Thomas 553 So. 2d 980 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
  • State v. Porter 547 So. 2d 736 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
  • State v. Byrd 540 So. 2d 1110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
  • State v. Johnson 541 So. 2d 818 La. 1989
  • State v. Scott 537 So. 2d 398 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
  • State v. Montana 533 So. 2d 983 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
  • State v. Everett 530 So. 2d 615 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
  • State v. Johnson 525 So. 2d 301 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
    State v. Latin, supra , suggest that, if the statement may be interpreted as referring to other possible witnesses and not to defendant alone, the statement does not constitute reversible error.
  • State v. Williams 524 So. 2d 1221 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
    stated: "A statement that the state's evidence is uncontradicted is not necessarily a prohibited comment on defendant's failure to testify.
  • State v. Wiley 513 So. 2d 849 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
  • State v. White 498 So. 2d 1100 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
  • State v. Neidlinger 498 So. 2d 189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1986
  • State v. Newman 491 So. 2d 174 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
    The prosecutor's remarks did not focus on defendant in terms of "he is the only one who can tell us what happened" or "the state's evidence is uncontroverted" or "the defendant is the only one who knows", but instead, the remarks obviously center on the State's witness and the State's case in chief.