Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Brand, 520 So. 2d 114.

42 citing documents.

State v. Lampton 249 So. 3d 235 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Brand , , 117 (La.
State v. Broome 136 So. 3d 979 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
State of Louisiana v. Kenrard D. Broussard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
(footnote omitted), the court explained: Entrapment is an affirmative defense.
State v. Jones 99 So. 3d 1061 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
*1066 117 (La.1988); State v. Smith, 97-2221 (La.App.
State v. Williams 80 So. 3d 626 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Henderson 58 So. 3d 552 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. *559 Brand, State v. Presson, 39,688 (La.App.2d Cir.4/6/05), .
In Re Clark 25 So. 3d 728 La. 2009
[5] this court held that it is the defendant's burden to prove the affirmative defense of entrapment, i.e., that a law enforcement official or an undercover agent acting in cooperation with such an official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of a crime, originates the idea of the crime and then induces anot
State v. Carter 974 So. 2d 181 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
State v. Presson, 39,688 (La.App.
State of Louisiana v. Shedrick Dewayne Ross La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Falcon 956 So. 2d 650 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
Bates , 03-352 at p. 4, 853 So.2d at 74 .
State v. NIONS 952 So. 2d 770 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
State v. Smith, 97-2221 (La.App.
State v. Presson 900 So. 2d 240 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
State v. Bradford, 32,747 (La.App.2d Cir.10/27/99), ; State v. Kerrigan, 27,846 (La.
State v. Bates 853 So. 2d 71 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Petta, 98-745, pp. 7-8 (La.App.
State v. Rogers 850 So. 2d 838 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
State v. Petta, 98-745, pp. 7-8 (La.App.
State v. Simpson 829 So. 2d 650 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
State v. Harry 823 So. 2d 987 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
State v. Smith, 97-2221 (La.App.
State v. Williams 822 So. 2d 780 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
State v. Stewart 803 So. 2d 120 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
the Supreme Court discussed the defense of entrapment: Entrapment is a defense which arises when law enforcement officials or an undercover agent acting in cooperation with such an official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of a crime, originates [sic] the idea of the crime and then induces anothe
State v. Iron 780 So. 2d 1123 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
State v. Weaver 775 So. 2d 613 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
as follows: *616 Entrapment is a defense which arises when a law enforcement official or an undercover agent acting in cooperation with such an official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of a crime, originates the idea of the crime and then induces another person to engage in conduct constituting the c
State v. Green 779 So. 2d 835 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
as follows: Entrapment is a defense which arises when a law enforcement official or an undercover agent acting in cooperation with such an official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of a crime, originates the idea of the crime and then induces another person to engage in conduct constituting the crime
State v. Alford 765 So. 2d 1120 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
as follows: Entrapment is a defense which arises when a law enforcement official or an undercover agent acting in cooperation with such an official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of a crime, originates the idea of the crime and then induces another person to engage in conduct constituting the crime
State v. Kanost 759 So. 2d 184 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
explained that entrapment is an affirmative defense which arises when a law enforcement official originates the idea of the crime, and then induces another person to engage in conduct constituting the offense, when that other person is not predisposed to do so.
State v. Bradford 745 So. 2d 800 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Long 744 So. 2d 143 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
as follows: Entrapment is a defense which arises when a law enforcement official or an undercover agent acting in cooperation with such an official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of a crime, originates the idea of the crime and then induces another person to engage in conduct constituting the crime
State v. Smith 734 So. 2d 826 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
The Louisiana Supreme Court, (La.
State v. Petta 729 So. 2d 29 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
*32 at 116 in which the Court stated: Entrapment is a defense which arises when a law enforcement official or an undercover agent acting in cooperation with such an official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of a crime, originates the idea of the crime and then induces another person to engage in conduct constituting
State v. Hardy 715 So. 2d 466 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
See, State v. Kerrigan, supra
State v. Kerrigan 671 So. 2d 1242 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
State v. Piazza 668 So. 2d 1125 La. 1996
State v. Caldwell 616 So. 2d 713 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Smith 614 So. 2d 778 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Simon 607 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Chatman 599 So. 2d 335 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Tate 593 So. 2d 864 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. St. Amant 584 So. 2d 724 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
State v. Byrd 568 So. 2d 554 La. 1990
(further citation omitted).
State v. Alpaugh 568 So. 2d 1379 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
as follows: Entrapment is a defense which arises when a law enforcement official or an undercover agent acting in cooperation with such an official, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of a crime, originates the idea of the crime and then induces another person to engage in conduct constituting the c
State v. Chiles 569 So. 2d 45 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Rankin 563 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
1987), affirmed, ; (La.App.
State v. Kimple 543 So. 2d 623 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Deville 524 So. 2d 1334 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988