Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Strain, 585 So. 2d 540.

146 citing documents.

State v. Potts 747 So. 2d 106 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Dunn, 30,269 (La.App.2d Cir.2/25/98), .
State v. Rison 746 So. 2d 46 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Gaar 746 So. 2d 41 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Acosta 740 So. 2d 613 La. 1999
Writ granted and remanded to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for briefing, argument, and State v. Carlos, 98-KK-1366
State v. Burford 738 So. 2d 1158 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
State v. Sudds 730 So. 2d 1056 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
held that whether an accused has knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel is a question which depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.
State v. George 743 So. 2d 685 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
State v. Guccione, 96-1049 (La.App.
State v. Deshotel 730 So. 2d 994 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
“While the judge need not inquire into each and every factor [set forth above], in order to establish a valid waiver of the right to counsel at trial, there must be sufficient inquiry (preferably by an interchange with the accused that elicits more than ‘yes’ and ‘no’ responses) to establish on the record a knowing and intelligent waiver under the overall circumstances.”
State v. Post 729 So. 2d 38 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
The Louisiana Supreme Court discussed elements of a (La.
State v. White 727 So. 2d 574 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
State v. Inzina 728 So. 2d 458 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
Regarding the waiver of the right to counsel, stated that the judge should advise the defendant of his right to counsel and to appointed counsel if he is indigent.
State v. Stevison 721 So. 2d 843 La. 1998
Before a court may accept an uncounseled plea to a misdemeanor offense in Louisiana, it must expressly advise the accused of his right to counsel and to appointed counsel if he is indigent, and determine, "`on the record that the waiver is made knowingly and intelligently under the circumstances.'" Deroche , 96-1376, p. 1, 682 So.2d at 1252 ().
Explained State v. Drumgole 721 So. 2d 956 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
In the writ order, this court noted that "this incomplete record does not show a proper waiver of counsel" and set forth the guidelines for securing a : The judge, in accepting a waiver of counsel at trial, should advise the accused of the nature of the charges and the penalty range, should inquire into the accused's age, education and mental condition, and should determine according to the totality of the circumstances whether the accused *960 underst
State v. Lambert 720 So. 2d 724 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
In Louisiana, acknowledged that no talismanic words or phrases were necessary and that less judicial inquiry on the part of a trial judge is permissible in the misdemeanor guilty-plea context vis-a-vis the felony guilty-plea context, but that a waiver must be nonetheless determined by the court to be knowing and intellig
State v. Branch 714 So. 2d 1277 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
State v. Authement 713 So. 2d 1226 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
-44 (La.1991); State v. Marcoux, 96-0453, pp. 2-3 (La.App.
State v. Dunn 713 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
Faretta, supra; State v. Moore, 29,212 (La.App.
State v. Lodrigue 712 So. 2d 671 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
State v. Treadway 710 So. 2d 1121 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
State v. Guccione, 96-1049, p. 8 (La.App.
State v. Guidry 709 So. 2d 233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
The defendant filed a motion to quash the bill of information, (La.App.
State v. Garrity 708 So. 2d 1096 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
792 , 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1963)
State v. Thomas 702 So. 2d 1151 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
We note “[t]he crime of driving while intoxicated is a non-complex crime, even among misdemeanors, and is almost self-explanatory.”
State v. Snider 707 So. 2d 1262 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
State v. Nelson 712 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
State v. Sadler 693 So. 2d 866 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
State v. Mahogany 694 So. 2d 505 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
citing Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U.S. 708 , 68 S.Ct.
State v. Guccione 694 So. 2d 1060 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
State v. Marcoux 691 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
-44 (La.1991), affirming (La.App.
State v. Price 690 So. 2d 191 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1997
State v. Moore 687 So. 2d 647 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1997
884 , 8 L.Ed.2d 70 (1962)
State v. Deroche 682 So. 2d 1251 La. 1996
State v. Deroche 674 So. 2d 291 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Fritcher 672 So. 2d 295 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Stewart 656 So. 2d 677 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
State v. Bond 650 So. 2d 354 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1995
State v. Penson 630 So. 2d 274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. Hattaway 621 So. 2d 796 La. 1993
State v. Morris 619 So. 2d 184 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Ladner 619 So. 2d 1144 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. Gable 614 So. 2d 808 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
2006 , 32 L.Ed.2d 530 (1972); (La.
State v. Rivers 614 So. 2d 254 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Finigan 604 So. 2d 1299 La. 1992
State v. Castillo 595 So. 2d 717 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Lawrence 600 So. 2d 1341 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
1st Cir.1990), affirmed, this court, sitting en banc, (La.App.
State v. Pugh 588 So. 2d 702 La. 1991
State v. Aultman 585 So. 2d 545 La. 1991
consolidated for argument with this case and also decided this day, the rulings of the lower courts are affirmed.