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. Tate 33 So. 3d 292 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    State v. Taylor, 04-346, p. 4 (La.App.
  • State v. Turner 32 So. 3d 277 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Holden 30 So. 3d 1053 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
  • State v. Ramirez 30 So. 3d 833 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Guilleard 26 So. 3d 865 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Hearold, *870 State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Collins 30 So. 3d 72 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Kelton Greenard 26 So. 3d 239 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Ernest D. Cain La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • State of Louisiana v. Austin Blake Ceaser La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    any violation of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law which 2 “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. Ceaser 21 So. 3d 1122 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    "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.” (La.
  • State v. Nelson 25 So. 3d 905 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Holder 25 So. 3d 920 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State v. Marks 28 So. 3d 342 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State ex rel. J.L. 23 So. 3d 993 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
    16 the Supreme Court stated: Intent is a condition of mind which is usually proved by evidence of circumstances from which intent may be inferred.
  • State v. Ashley 22 So. 3d 1045 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Clark 22 So. 3d 240 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
  • State v. Stukes 19 So. 3d 1233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    State v. Shaw, 2007-1427 (La.App.
  • State v. Culp 17 So. 3d 429 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State v. Manning 15 So. 3d 1204 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Duncan 15 So. 3d 1171 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth five factors to consider in determining whether a party had the intent to distribute narcotics.
  • State v. GRH 10 So. 3d 896 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • State of Louisiana v. G. R. H. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    Sufficiency of Evidence “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. Collins 12 So. 3d 1069 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Schaller 15 So. 3d 1046 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    State v. Guillard, 04-899 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Rodney J. Tolliver La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    1 “When issues are raised on appeal both as to 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. Tolliver 11 So. 3d 584 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    "When issues are raised on appeal both as to 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. Simpkins 12 So. 3d 1021 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Black 12 So. 3d 1014 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Mosley 13 So. 3d 705 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Bauman 15 So. 3d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State of Louisiana v. John Stanley La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • State of Louisiana v. Marcus James Jason La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    State v. Gaspard, 99-481 (La.App.
  • State v. Jason 9 So. 3d 336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    State v. Gaspard, 99-481 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Lee Vidrine La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • State v. Vidrine 9 So. 3d 1095 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Rabun 5 So. 3d 1060 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Brown 7 So. 3d 1238 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
    in which the court stated: 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. Langston 3 So. 3d 707 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,-253 (La.App.
  • State v. Eason 3 So. 3d 685 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. CSD 4 So. 3d 204 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    we always take up sufficiency of the evidence assignments *212 first.
  • State of Louisiana v. C.S.D. & E.L.C. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    we always take up sufficiency of the evidence assignments first.
  • State v. Lawrence 5 So. 3d 896 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Stipe 4 So. 3d 189 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    970 , 67 L.Ed.2d 30 (1981)
  • State v. Johnson 2 So. 3d 606 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Parker, 42,311 (La.App.
  • State v. Foster 3 So. 3d 595 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Carmen 3 So. 3d 587 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Mitchell 7 So. 3d 720 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Warren 2 So. 3d 523 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Williams 3 So. 3d 526 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. Hicks 3 So. 3d 539 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    State v. Guillard, 04-899, p. 9 (La.App.