Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Knox, 609 So. 2d 803.

33 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Trevor Marcel Williams La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2022
State of Louisiana v. Kenneth Jones La. 2019
2 2348, 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992) (La.
State of Louisiana v. Johnny Lee Harris 217 So. 3d 255 La. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Ceasar James Williams -Aka- Ceaser James Williams La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
State v. Williams 181 So. 3d 857 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State of Louisiana v. Johnny Lee Harris La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2015
State v. Pierce 131 So. 3d 136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Johnson 135 So. 3d 705 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
State v. Coleman 121 So. 3d 703 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2013
State of Louisiana v. Brendall Bourque La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Bourque 114 So. 3d 642 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Nelson 85 So. 3d 21 La. 2012
State v. Johnson 57 So. 3d 1087 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
2348 , 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992)
State v. Breaux 55 So. 3d 806 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
2348 , 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992)
State v. Singleton 953 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2348 , 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992), Batson extends to actions by defendants as well as the State.
State of Louisiana v. Justin Charles Singleton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2348 (1992), Batson extends to actions by defendants as well as the State.
State v. Scott 921 So. 2d 904 La. 2006
this court interpreted McCollum to prohibit black criminal defendants from exercising their peremptory challenges to exclude white jurors.
State of Louisiana v. Damian S. Burgess La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
State v. Burgess 876 So. 2d 263 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
2348 , 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992)
State v. Stewart 866 So. 2d 1016 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
2348 , 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992); (La.
State v. White 850 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
2348 , 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992)
State v. Shepherd 839 So. 2d 1103 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
State v. Dunn 831 So. 2d 862 La. 2002
this court interpreted McCollum to apply to black criminal defendants and held that McCollum prohibits them from exercising their peremptory challenges to exclude white jurors from the jury.
State v. Wade 832 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
2348 , 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992)
State v. Wade 758 So. 2d 987 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
2348 , 120 L.Ed.2d 33 (1992)] and [ State v. ] Knox[ ], the ultimate burden of persuasion remains on the party objecting to the challenge to prove purposeful discrimination.
State v. Tyler 723 So. 2d 939 La. 1998
After the McCollum decision, which involved a white defendant's striking black venire persons, interpreted McCollum to apply when a black criminal defendant challenges a white venireman and held that the McCollum rationale prohibits black defendants from exercising peremptory challenges to exclude white prospective jurors.
State v. Schexnayder 685 So. 2d 357 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1996
State v. Dugas 683 So. 2d 1253 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
State v. Moore 640 So. 2d 561 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
the Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant may not engage in purposeful discrimination on the ground of race in the exercise of peremptory challenges.
State v. Wilson 632 So. 2d 861 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1994
State v. Spencer 631 So. 2d 1363 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1994
the Louisiana Supreme Court decided that McCollum equally prohibited a black criminal defendant from exercising peremptory challenges to exclude white jurors based solely on race.
State v. Azema 633 So. 2d 723 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
1364 , 113 L.Ed.2d 411 (1991); (per curiam).
State v. Arbuthnot 625 So. 2d 1377 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
1364 , 113 L.Ed.2d 411 (1991); (per curiam).