Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Hattaway, 621 So. 2d 796.

31 citing documents.

State Of Louisiana v. David Brown La. 2022
State v. Preston 178 So. 3d 207 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Hattaway, 91-894 (La.7/2/93), , overruled in part on other grounds by Carter, supra.
State v. Fields 120 So. 3d 309 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
-809 (La.1993), overruled on other grounds, State v. Carter, 94-2859 (La.11/27/95), .
State v. Martin 72 So. 3d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Montejo 40 So. 3d 952 La. 2010
defendant’s attorney, it cannot take advantage of any time gained by that ploy to obtain incriminating statements”); -19 (La.1982) (violation of Sixth Amendment for police to interrogate defendant after his attorney instructed police not to interrogate him without counsel present or take him to the scene where the victim’s body was found); (police violated defendant’s Sixth Amendment rights when they unlawfully removed him from the trial venue without notice to his court appointed counsel and tr
State v. Reeves 11 So. 3d 1031 La. 2009
overruled in part on other grounds, State v. Carter, 1994-2859 (La.
State v. Montejo 974 So. 2d 1238 La. 2008
The state responds that the law is not fully settled on the consequences of a 72- and State v. Carter, 94-2859 (La.11/27/95), , and notes further that the defendant only stood in mute acquiescence at this hearing, but argues (assuming that a right to counsel attached at that time) that the defendant validly waived his right to the presence of counsel (after a full Mirandizat
State v. Lagarde 917 So. 2d 623 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
310 , 136 L.Ed.2d 227 (1996), overruled on other grounds in State v. Carter, 94-2859 (La.11/27/95); .
State v. Hopkins 897 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
and United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 , 87 S.Ct.
State v. Wallace 862 So. 2d 286 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
In 1993, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that the right to counsel under La.
State v. Tarver 846 So. 2d 851 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
Const. art. I, § 13, the court held that the right to counsel under this constitutional provision attached no later than a defendant's initial court appearance or first judicial hearing and thereafter applied to pre-trial proceedings which would be considered "critical stages" under the jurisprudence interpreting the Sixth Amen
State v. Broyard 802 So. 2d 845 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
overruled in part, State v. Carter, 94-2859 (La.11/27/95), , for the proposition that a physical lineup of the accused without the benefit of counsel “during adverse judicial criminal proceedings” violates the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
State v. Monroe 784 So. 2d 29 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
Defendant argues that his right to counsel attached when counsel was appointed on December 17, 1998, and that once the right to counsel attaches, it cannot be waived
State v. Duplessis 777 So. 2d 529 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
the right to counsel had not yet attached during the identification because the state's role was one of investigation and not accusation.
State v. Carter 767 So. 2d 839 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
(Footnote omitted) overruled in part, State v. Carter, 94-2859 (La.11/27/95), , questioned, State v. Taylor, 93-2201 (La.2/28/96), , the Louisiana Supreme Court previously concluded the state violated defendant's right to counsel when it unlawfully removed him from the trial venue without noti
State v. Carter 712 So. 2d 701 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
State v. Kimble 688 So. 2d 552 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
Specifically, it is argued that the state overstepped Coleman's constitutional guarantees when, after the appointment of a public defender, officers interviewed her without first contacting that attorney.
Stewart v. State 676 So. 2d 87 La. 1996
[*] this court determined that the right to counsel guaranteed by Louisiana Constitution Article I, § 13 attaches no later than the first court appearance or judicial hearing, rather than at the time of indictment as previously understood.
State v. Hattaway 674 So. 2d 380 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
State v. Tart 672 So. 2d 116 La. 1996
overruled on other grounds, State v. Carter, supra .
State v. Taylor 669 So. 2d 364 La. 1996
art. 841(B) ("The requirement of an objection shall not apply to the court's ruling on any written motion.") [16] to support his argument that the second confession was inadmissible.
State v. Bias 674 So. 2d 265 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
Because the defendant chose to proceed under the sentencing recommendation agreement and defense counsel was a participant with the defendant in all proceedings after November 21, 1994, regarding the State's direct communications with the defendant after the appointment of counsel.
State v. Carter 664 So. 2d 367 La. 1995
Because we find the defendant in the instant case in fact did not invoke or assert his right to counsel and subsequently made a valid waiver, we decline to revisit the issue of whether or not the right to counsel attaches at the initial appearance
State v. Moore 663 So. 2d 250 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
State v. Van Winkle 658 So. 2d 198 La. 1995
Ms. Van Winkle now appeals, advancing three assignments of error: (1) (2) The trial court erred in denying her the opportunity to present a defense and cross examine her accusers; and (3) The trial court erred in prohibiting her from presenting evidence as to her mental condition bearing on the weight to be given the various statements obtained from her.
State v. Samuels 657 So. 2d 562 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
City of Baton Rouge v. Ross 654 So. 2d 1311 La. 1995
State v. Schirmer, 93-KA-2631 (La.1994), ( Dennis, J., concurring )
State v. Schirmer 646 So. 2d 890 La. 1995
Pace v. STATE THROUGH LA. STATE EMP. RET. SYSTEM 648 So. 2d 1302 La. 1995
State v. Duncan 648 So. 2d 1090 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
2389 , 101 L.Ed.2d 261 (1988)
State v. Van Winkle 635 So. 2d 1177 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
to support her argument that her constitutional right to counsel was violated.