Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Mosby, 595 So. 2d 1135.

114 citing documents.

State v. Boyer 56 So. 3d 1119 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
The jurisprudence has recognized that the rule espoused in Vigee is likewise subject to a balancing standard; “when ‘prejudice to the prosecution is balanced against defendant’s constitutional right to present relevant evidence in support of his defense, [the] balance should be weighed in favor of admissibility in those cases in which the prejudice is minimal.’ ” , 1138 n. 5 (La.1992)().
State v. Declouet 52 So. 3d 89 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
121 Relevant evidence is any “evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.” (citing LSA-C.E.
State v. Fernandez 50 So. 3d 219 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. MERANTA 30 So. 3d 1183 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Lawrence 32 So. 3d 329 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Laster 33 So. 3d 259 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Lathan, supra; State v. Pugh, 02-171 (La.App.
State ex rel. D.G. 11 So. 3d 548 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State Ex Rel. Dg 11 So. 3d 548 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
State v. Langston 3 So. 3d 707 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
State v. Brunet 5 So. 3d 316 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
State v. Sartain 2 So. 3d 1132 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973)
State v. Reed 1 So. 3d 561 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
State v. Reed 1 So. 3d 561 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
State v. Decay 989 So. 2d 132 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
State v. Lemeunier 986 So. 2d 130 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
State v. Myers 981 So. 2d 214 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
State v. Desoto 968 So. 2d 146 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. Jake C. Desoto La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Lathan 953 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
State v. Pugh, 02-171 (La.App.
State v. Davis 947 So. 2d 48 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
State v. Marshall, 02-747 (La.App.
State v. Stukes 944 So. 2d 679 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 *688 (1973)
State v. Johnson 940 So. 2d 711 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
State v. Jefferson 922 So. 2d 577 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
The jurisprudence has recognized that the rule espoused in Vigee is likewise subject to a balancing standard; "when `prejudice to the prosecution is balanced against defendant's constitutional right to present relevant evidence in support of his defense, [the] balance should be weighed in favor of admissibility in those cases in which the prejudice is minimal.'" , 1138 n. 5 (La.1992)().
State v. Brasseaux 919 So. 2d 738 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
art. 403; State v. Pugh, 02-171, p. 17 (La.App.
State v. Tauzin 880 So. 2d 157 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
State v. Hills 866 So. 2d 278 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Lyles 858 So. 2d 35 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Phillips 853 So. 2d 675 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
State v. Joseph 854 So. 2d 914 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
State v. Marshall 841 So. 2d 866 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Bridgewater, 98-658 (La.App.
State v. Pugh 831 So. 2d 341 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
State v. Carter, 96-358 (La.App.
State v. Dickerson 822 So. 2d 849 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
State v. Schleve 775 So. 2d 1187 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
State v. McCullough 774 So. 2d 1105 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973)
State v. Clark 780 So. 2d 418 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
State v. Cosey 779 So. 2d 675 La. 2000
State v. Dickerson 772 So. 2d 845 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
State v. Bridgewater, 98-658 (La.App.
State v. Wommack 770 So. 2d 365 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973); (La.
State v. Hotoph 750 So. 2d 1036 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
State v. Brown 746 So. 2d 643 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
State v. Duncan 738 So. 2d 706 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
State v. Hills 737 So. 2d 885 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
Crawford v. RYAN'S FAM. STEAK HOUSES, INC. 741 So. 2d 96 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
1st Cir.1991), where the court stated that "any evidence, whether direct or circumstantial, is relevant if it tends to prove or disprove existence of any material fact" (affirmed by the Louisiana Supreme Court, ).
Entergy Gulf States v. LPSC 730 So. 2d 890 La. 1999
Spellman v. Stalder 740 So. 2d 671 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
1 Cir.1991), affirmed, (1992).
State v. Green 735 So. 2d 723 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
1038 , 35 L.Ed.2d 297 (1973)
State v. Richardson 729 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
State v. Francis 727 So. 2d 1235 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
State v. Calloway 718 So. 2d 559 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
State v. Batiste 708 So. 2d 764 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998