Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Taylor, 635 So. 2d 416.

21 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Navarri R. Henderson La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
App. 4 Cir. 3/29/94), ).
State of Louisiana v. Danial Lewayne Lafleur -Aka- Daniel Lafleur -Aka- Daniel Lee Lafleur -Aka- Danial Lafleur La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
4 Cir. 3/29/94), this court cited Legendre for the proposition that Louisiana jurisprudence indicates that mental illness should be used as a mitigating factor in sentencing.
State v. Lafleur 209 So. 3d 927 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
4 Cir. 3/29/94) , , this court cited Legendre for the proposition that Louisiana jurisprudence indicates that mental illness should be used as a mitigating factor in sentencing.
State v. Sippio 133 So. 3d 294 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 3/29/94), (contemporaneous objection rule exists so error may be corrected at the time it is made and also “serves notice in the record that the complained of conduct was so noticeable as to create prejudice in the minds of the jurors”).
State v. Celestine 131 So. 3d 947 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 3/29/94), , “[t]he contemporaneous objection rule exists, not only so that a trial judge may correct the error at the time it is made, but it also serves notice in the record that the complained of conduct was so noticeable as to create prejudice in the minds of the jurors.” Thus, Mr. Celestine failed to preserve any argum
State v. Allen 126 So. 3d 675 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 3/29/94), , “[t]he contemporaneous objection rule exists, not only so that a trial judge may correct the error at the time it is made, but it also serves notice in the record that the complained of conduct was so noticeable as to create prejudice in the minds of the jurors.” Defendant contends that the prosecutor’s comment
State v. Burke 103 So. 3d 652 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Parker 76 So. 3d 55 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 3/29/94), , 420: “The contemporaneous objection rule exists, not only so that a trial judge may correct the error at the time it is made, but it also serves notice in the record that the complained of conduct was so noticeable as to create prejudice in the minds of the jurors.” |21In any event, we find there was sufficient evid
State v. Harrell 965 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
State v. Batiste 947 So. 2d 810 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
4 Cir. 3/29/94) , , the defendant and the victim had fought several times in the past.
State v. Foster 834 So. 2d 1188 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
4 Cir. 3/29/94) , , this court cited Legendre for the proposition that Louisiana jurisprudence indicates that mental illness should be used as a mitigating factor in sentencing.
State v. Stark 736 So. 2d 331 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
2 Cir. 2/28/96), , writ denied 96-0836 (La.9/20/96), ; State v. Taylor, 91-2496 (La.App.4 Cir.3/9/94), .
State v. Richardson 703 So. 2d 1371 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1997
App. 4th Cir. 3/29/94), .
State v. Cockerham 671 So. 2d 967 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
4th Cir. 3/29/94), , 420: "The contemporaneous objection rule exists, not only so that a trial judge may correct the error at the time it is made, but it also serves notice in the record that the complained of conduct was so noticeable as to create prejudice in the minds of the jurors."
State v. Scott 669 So. 2d 664 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
4th Cir. 03/29/94), ; (La.App.
State v. Black 669 So. 2d 667 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
4th Cir. 3/29/94), , found a 21-year maximum sentence for manslaughter was not excessive where the defendant shot the victim four times as the victim was attempting to flee from an argument concerning damage to a car.
State v. Chambers 666 So. 2d 716 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
State v. Clements 665 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
4th Cir. 3/29/94), , this court af *141 firmed a máximum twenty-one year sentence for manslaughter where the defendant shot the victim four times in the back.
State v. Freelon 655 So. 2d 687 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1995
4th Cir. 03/29/94), (victim shot repeatedly with a machine gun).
State v. May 654 So. 2d 829 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
State v. McKinney 637 So. 2d 1120 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994