Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Pierre, 500 So. 2d 382.

26 citing documents.

State v. Gilmore 50 So. 3d 208 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Davis, 02-2059, p. 5 (La.App.
State v. Taylor 956 So. 2d 25 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
State v. Ingram 888 So. 2d 923 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
cited by the Defendant, the Louisiana Supreme Court discussed intent with regard to La.R.S.
State v. Odom 861 So. 2d 202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
State v. Williams 842 So. 2d 1143 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
82 , 107 L.Ed.2d 48 (1989)
State v. Davis 839 So. 2d 176 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
State v. Hair 784 So. 2d 1269 La. 2001
see also Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 358 , 103 S.Ct.
State v. Dabney 772 So. 2d 247 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
82 , 107 L.Ed.2d 48 (1989); State v. Bonanno, 245 La.
State v. Stephenson 766 So. 2d 642 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
82 , 107 L.Ed.2d 48 (1989); (La.
State v. Smith 766 So. 2d 501 La. 2000
82 , 107 L.Ed.2d 48 (1989); State v. Bonanno, 245 La.
State v. Smith 729 So. 2d 648 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
State v. Norfleet 721 So. 2d 506 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
State v. Boyd 710 So. 2d 1074 La. 1998
82 , 107 L.Ed.2d 48 (1989)
State v. Byrd 708 So. 2d 401 La. 1998
see also Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 358 , 103 S.Ct.
State v. Hart 687 So. 2d 94 La. 1997
State v. Sandifer 679 So. 2d 1324 La. 1996
82 , 107 L.Ed.2d 48 (1989)
State v. Ganier 660 So. 2d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
“A criminal statute is unconstitutionally vague if it does not give individuals adequate notice that certain conduct is proscribed and punishable by law, and if it does not provide adequate standards for those charged with determining the accused’s guilt or innocence.” (citation omitted).
State v. Walker 637 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
State v. Griffin, supra .
State v. Hookfin 602 So. 2d 757 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
the Supreme Court stated: A criminal statute is unconstitutionally vague if it does not give individuals adequate notice that certain conduct is proscribed and punishable by law, and if it does not provide adequate standards for those charged with determining the accused’s guilt or innocence.
State v. Romero 574 So. 2d 330 La. 1990
State v. Conway 556 So. 2d 1323 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
1855 , 75 L.Ed.2d 903 (1983)
State v. Robinson 552 So. 2d 994 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
which held that the criminal intent required by the statute is implicit in the word "represented" and the State proves the necessary intent by showing that the offender produced or distributed the substance which he represented to be a controlled dangerous substance.
State v. Azar 539 So. 2d 1222 La. 1989
State v. Bellard 533 So. 2d 961 La. 1988
State v. Dugas 527 So. 2d 610 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
the penalty of five years at hard labor for violations of La.R.S.
State v. Dugas 527 So. 2d 610 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988