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. Hearold, 603 So. 2d 731.

1244 citing documents.

  • State v. Brown 56 So. 3d 1095 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    State v. Marcantel, 2000-1629, p. 8 (La.4/3/02)
  • State v. Huntley 60 So. 3d 644 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
  • State v. Malone 56 So. 3d 336 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Hea rold; State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Fred Ballard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    the court explained in pertinent part: When issues are raised on appeal both as to the sufficiency of the evidence and as to one or more trial errors, the reviewing court should first determine the sufficiency of the evidence.
  • State v. Enterkin 56 So. 3d 257 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Bruce 54 So. 3d 87 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State of Louisiana v. Clyde A. Bowens La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State v. Dillard 55 So. 3d 56 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Warren, 28,889 (La.App.2d Cir. 12/11/96), .
  • State v. Scott 48 So. 3d 1080 La. 2010
    (factors in determining whether circumstantial evidence is sufficient to prove the intent to distribute a controlled dangerous substance include: (1) whether the defendant ever distributed or attempted to distribute the drug; (2) whether the drug was in a form usually associated with possession for distr
  • State v. Johnson 52 So. 3d 110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    See, State v. Esteen, 02-1241 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. H. A., Sr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    1 we address this assignment of error first in the event the defendant is entitled to an acquittal.
  • State v. HA, SR. 47 So. 3d 34 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    As | ¡¡ we address this assignment of error first in the event the defendant is entitled to an acquittal.
  • State v. Youngblood 48 So. 3d 1122 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Burns 48 So. 3d 344 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Davis 47 So. 3d 1112 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Marshall 47 So. 3d 1083 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    *1087 State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State Ex Rel. Dw 47 So. 3d 1048 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2010
  • State v. Blow 46 So. 3d 735 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.
  • State v. Stewart 46 So. 3d 714 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Rocky Bourg La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    We first address Defendant’s pro se assignment of error that “the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for first degree robbery.” “When issues are raised on appeal both as to the sufficiency of the evidence and as to one or more trial errors, the reviewing court should first determine the sufficiency of the evidence.”
  • State v. Bourg 42 So. 3d 1079 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    We first address Defendant’s pro se assignment of error that “the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for first degree robbery.” “When issues are raised on appeal both as to the sufficiency of the evidence and as to one or more trial errors, the reviewing court should first determine the sufficiency of the evidence.”
  • State v. White 44 So. 3d 750 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Defendant’s second assignment of error will be addressed first, in which the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that when the issues on appeal relate to both sufficiency of the evidence and one or more trial errors, the reviewing court should first determine the sufficiency of the evidence.
  • State v. Goldman 41 So. 3d 642 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,-253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Robert 42 So. 3d 1059 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Givens 41 So. 3d 589 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    | ¿ State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Eric L. Hunter La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State v. Hunter 41 So. 3d 546 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Preston 40 So. 3d 1052 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Knight 36 So. 3d 1163 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Marcus Quinn, Sr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State v. Quinn 38 So. 3d 1102 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Taylor 38 So. 3d 1062 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    State v. Smith , XXXX-XXXX, pp. 3-4 (La.App.
  • State v. Deluzain 38 So. 3d 1054 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State of Louisiana v. D D La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State v. DD 34 So. 3d 1169 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State v. Gipson 34 So. 3d 1090 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
  • State of Louisiana v. Toby James Fruge La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State of Louisiana v. Kendall Paul Davis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    and State v. Taylor, 96-320 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Leonard Lewis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    Further, we will address these assignments of error, which pertain to the sufficiency of the evidence
  • State v. Fruge 34 So. 3d 422 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Davis 36 So. 3d 351 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    and State v. Taylor, 96-320 (La.App.
  • State v. Lewis 33 So. 3d 1046 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    Further, we will address these assignments of error, which pertain to the sufficiency of the evidence
  • State v. LOUP 34 So. 3d 1166 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Wilson 32 So. 3d 1152 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Bosley, 29, 253 (La.App.
  • State v. Lawrence 32 So. 3d 329 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Wilkes Laird La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
    “When issues are raised on appeal both as to the sufficiency of the evidence and as to one or more trial errors, the reviewing court should first determine the sufficiency of the evidence.”
  • State v. Laird 30 So. 3d 1167 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    “When issues are raised on appeal both as tó the sufficiency of the evidence and as to one or more trial errors, the reviewing court should first determine the sufficiency of the evidence.” State v. *1174 Hearold
  • State v. Davidson 32 So. 3d 290 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Knight 34 So. 3d 307 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Hyman 33 So. 3d 271 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010