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. Gilliam 842 So. 2d 1198 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    State v. Sharp, 35,714 (La.App.2d Cir.2/27/02), .
  • State v. Frazier 843 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Francois 844 So. 2d 1042 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
  • State v. Anderson 842 So. 2d 1222 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
  • State v. Robinson 846 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
  • State v. Price 842 So. 2d 491 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    State v. Marcantel, XXXX-XXXX, p. 8 (La.4/3/02), ; State v. Hearold, 90-2094 (La.1992), .
  • State v. Watson 844 So. 2d 198 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
  • State v. Hall 843 So. 2d 488 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth five factors to consider in determining whether a party had the intent to distribute narcotics.
  • State v. Johnson 839 So. 2d 1247 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Wright 840 So. 2d 1271 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Green 839 So. 2d 970 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
  • State v. Shepherd 839 So. 2d 1103 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
  • State v. Dixon 839 So. 2d 1141 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    we shall discuss this assignment of error first.
  • State v. Myers 839 So. 2d 1183 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    (1992) (footnote omitted).
  • State v. Jones 841 So. 2d 965 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
  • State v. Sandoval 841 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. Alexis, 98-1145 (La.App.
  • State v. Antoine 841 So. 2d 874 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    The Broadway court, further stated: Absent some unique circumstances in which the explanation of purpose is probative evidence of a contested fact, such hearsay evidence should not be admitted under an "explanation" exception.
  • State v. Lam 837 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Joseph 836 So. 2d 1206 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Thornton 836 So. 2d 1235 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
  • State v. Page 837 So. 2d 165 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. Mayeux, 94-105 (La.App.
  • State ex rel. B.L. 839 So. 2d 246 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    State v. Taylor, 99-1154 (La.App.
  • State v. Gilbert 839 So. 2d 250 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    Quest , 00-205, p. 21, 772 So.2d at 786.
  • State v. Lee 836 So. 2d 589 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    NOTES [1] State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Noil, 01-521, p. 12 (La.App.
  • State v. Ruffin 836 So. 2d 625 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
  • State v. Guerra 834 So. 2d 1206 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d.Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Weber 834 So. 2d 540 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    However, the Louisiana Supreme Court explained: | Generally, an explanation of the officer’s actions should never be an acceptable basis upon which to admit an out-of-court declaration when the so-called “explanation” involves a direct assertion of criminal activity against the accused ...
  • State v. Cooks 833 So. 2d 1034 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Tracy 831 So. 2d 503 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
  • State v. Tapps 832 So. 2d 995 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    State v. Mayeux, 94-105 (La.App.
  • State v. Gay 830 So. 2d 356 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.04/02/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Gay 830 So. 2d 356 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.04/02/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Wade 832 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    a rational jury could find him guilty of only simple possession.
  • State v. Hines 829 So. 2d 530 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    Factors that may give rise to a reasonable inference of the specific intent to distribute a as follows: (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 distribution to others; (3) whether the amount of drug created an inference of an intent to distribute; (4) whether expert or other testi
  • State v. Stokes 828 So. 2d 631 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied 97-1203 (La 10/17/93), .
  • State v. Shed 828 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Shed 828 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Willis 823 So. 2d 1072 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Batchelor 823 So. 2d 367 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Dickerson 822 So. 2d 849 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    State v. Mayeux, 94-105 (La.App.
  • State v. Bush 822 So. 2d 859 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
  • State v. Davis 822 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
  • State v. Bridgewater 823 So. 2d 877 La. 2002
  • State v. Logan 822 So. 2d 657 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Johnson 821 So. 2d 652 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
  • State v. Fontana 821 So. 2d 571 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.2d Cir.4/2/97), , writ denied, 97-1203 (La.10/17/97), .
  • State v. Taylor 821 So. 2d 633 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    State v. Bosley, 29,253 (La.App.
  • State v. Strogen 814 So. 2d 725 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    970 , 67 L.Ed.2d 30 (1981), the accused may be entitled to an acquittal if the evidence does not satisfy the standard of Jackson v. Virginia, supra ; (La.
  • State v. Dangerfield 816 So. 2d 885 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    -38 (La.1992), the Louisiana Supreme Court added: Generally, an explanation of the officer's actions should never be an acceptable basis upon which to admit an out-of-court declaration when the so-called "explanation" involves a direct assertion of criminal activity against the accused.....Absent some unique circu
  • State v. Marcantel 815 So. 2d 50 La. 2002