Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Manchester, 545 So. 2d 528.

16 citing documents.

  • State Of Louisiana v. Montrey Trevell Paige La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
  • State v. Wells 191 So. 3d 1127 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
  • State v. Dubose 128 So. 3d 613 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
    State v. Walker, 32,342 (La.App.
  • State ex rel. Iburg v. State 118 So. 3d 372 La. 2013
    Aleman v. State, 99-0488 (La.10/1/99), ; -30 (La.1989); Wayne R. LaFave, Criminal Procedure, § 20.2(f), p. 607 (West 1984).
  • State v. R.A.L. 69 So. 3d 704 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
  • State v. RAL 69 So. 3d 704 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
  • State v. Boyte 973 So. 2d 900 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
    the supreme court explained that a trial judge has the right to reject a plea bargain even if the state and the defendant both concur as to its terms.
  • State v. Jefferson 838 So. 2d 724 La. 2003
    See State v. Scott, 93-0401 (La.3/16/95)
  • State v. Robinson 807 So. 2d 1085 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
  • State v. Smith 777 So. 2d 1223 La. 2001
    Aleman v. State, 99-0488 (La.10/1/99), ; State v. Scott, 93-0401 (La.3/17/95), ; Wayne R. LaFave, Criminal Procedure, § 20.2(f) (quoting McAleney v. United States, 539 F.2d 282 (1st Cir.1976)), relator fails to carry his burden of proof that he acted on the basis of any such advice.
  • State v. Walker 747 So. 2d 133 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
  • State v. Hennis 734 So. 2d 16 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
  • State v. Alexander 687 So. 2d 527 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
    Hughes v. Court of Appeal, First Circuit, (La.App.
  • State v. Boudreaux 616 So. 2d 733 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
    However, , 528-29 n. 2 (La.1989), the preferable procedure, in order to eliminate any misunderstanding concerning the terms of a plea agreement, is for the trial court in a guilty plea colloquy to have any plea bargain stated in detail on the record.
  • State v. Reeves 613 So. 2d 1061 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
    495 , 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971); (La.App.
  • State v. Gasca 575 So. 2d 913 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991