Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Johnson, 541 So. 2d 818.

96 citing documents.

State v. Hampton 750 So. 2d 867 La. 1999
State v. Smith 740 So. 2d 714 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
State v. Snyder 750 So. 2d 832 La. 1999
State v. Johnson 726 So. 2d 1126 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
In State v. [Saul] Johnson, [2] the defendant was convicted on two counts of first degree murder.
State v. Jackson 726 So. 2d 1061 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Langley, 95-1489 (La.4/14/98), (on original hearing); (La.
State v. Langley 711 So. 2d 651 La. 1998
State v. Robertson 712 So. 2d 8 La. 1998
held that satisfying Art. 905.4(A)(4) "need not always be under circumstances where there is specific intent to kill or inflict bodily harm on more than one person," because Art. 905.4(A)(4) "encompasses a broader range of conduct than the first degree murder definition ...
State v. Ward 712 So. 2d 139 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
State v. Arvie 709 So. 2d 810 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
State v. Hebert 697 So. 2d 1040 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Defendant relies on the jurisprudence which holds that when a defendant is the only person who can refute the state's evidence, *1045 an indirect reference to the defendant's failure to testify is reversible error
State v. Pooler 696 So. 2d 22 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
State v. Perkins, 423 So.2d at 1109-1110 ; (La.App.
State v. Brown 692 So. 2d 735 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
Our Louisiana Supreme Court has held with regard to such indirect comments that a reviewing court must “inquire into the remark’s ‘intended effect on the jury in order to distinguish indirect references to the defendant’s failure to testify (which are impermissible) from general statements that the prosecution’s case is unrebutted (which are permissible).”
State v. Colarte 688 So. 2d 587 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Handley 686 So. 2d 149 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Thornton, 94-1470 p. 10-11 (La.App.
State v. Timon 683 So. 2d 315 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
State v. Hamilton 681 So. 2d 1217 La. 1996
State v. Bowman 677 So. 2d 1094 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
State v. Durham 673 So. 2d 1103 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
appeal after remand, (La.App.
State v. Thornton 671 So. 2d 481 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
State v. Marine 648 So. 2d 1022 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
State v. Fullilove, supra.
State v. Camp 641 So. 2d 702 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
State v. Banks 627 So. 2d 756 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Armstrong 626 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. Bourque 622 So. 2d 198 La. 1993
State v. Morris 619 So. 2d 184 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Morris 615 So. 2d 327 La. 1993
State v. Clay 612 So. 2d 266 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
State v. Carouthers 607 So. 2d 1018 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
State v. Davis 602 So. 2d 150 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
the Supreme Court of Louisiana reversed a murder conviction primarily because of the state attorney’s closing remarks.
State v. Holiday 598 So. 2d 524 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Johnson 597 So. 2d 79 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Sullivan 596 So. 2d 177 La. 1992
State v. Lewis 590 So. 2d 1266 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
State v. Perkins, 423 So.2d at 1109-1110 .
State v. Rubin 588 So. 2d 1289 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
State v. Moser 588 So. 2d 1243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
State v. Lamark 584 So. 2d 686 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
State v. Fullilove, 389 So.2d at 1284 .
State v. Ray 577 So. 2d 354 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
State v. Slay 573 So. 2d 1185 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1991
State v. Goins 568 So. 2d 231 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Robinson 563 So. 2d 477 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Newberry 560 So. 2d 121 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
State v. Ramoin 554 So. 2d 278 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
State v. Vanderlinder 552 So. 2d 1274 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1989
State v. Arnold 548 So. 2d 920 La. 1989
appendix at 823 (La.1979)
State v. Deboue 552 So. 2d 355 La. 1989
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.
State v. Sergon 539 So. 2d 1275 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989