DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Shelton, 621 So. 2d 769.

391 citing documents.

  • State v. Isidore 845 So. 2d 1123 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    NOTES [1] State v. Carlos extended the burden-shifting principles applicable to multiple offenders, -780 (La.1993), to the recidivist provisions of the DWI statute.
  • State v. Robinson 846 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
  • State v. Vu 846 So. 2d 67 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    The Louisiana Supreme Court, in State v. Carlos, supra , applied to the recidivist portion of the DWI statute.
  • State v. Gaddis 839 So. 2d 1258 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
  • State v. Green 839 So. 2d 970 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
  • State v. Davis 841 So. 2d 952 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
  • State v. Jenkins 846 So. 2d 778 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
    the supreme court stated: We have consistently held that in order to enhance a sentence with a prior guilty plea, the State bears the burden of proving the guilty plea was constitutionally taken, and, to meet its burden, the State must introduce a contemporaneous record of a Boykin examination which de
  • State v. Williams 839 So. 2d 348 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
  • State v. Ruffin 836 So. 2d 625 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    When a predicate conviction was obtained pursuant to a plea of guilty
  • State v. Perez 831 So. 2d 542 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    State v. Carlos extended the burden-shifting principles applicable to multiple offenders, -780 (La.1993), to the recidivist provisions of the DWI statute.
  • State v. Williams 833 So. 2d 428 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    -780 (La.1993), the Supreme Court stated: If the defendant denies the allegations of the bill of information, the burden is on the State to prove the existence of the prior guilty pleas and that defendant was represented by counsel when they were taken.
  • State v. Robinson 831 So. 2d 460 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
  • State v. Zachary 829 So. 2d 405 La. 2002
    the evidence presented by the State to prove defendant's no contest plea from the state of Florida was sufficient to invoke the enhanced sentencing provisions of La.
  • State v. Wade 832 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    15:529.1 : If the defendant denies the allegations of the bill of information, the burden is on the State to prove the existence of the prior guilty pleas and that defendant was represented by counsel when they were taken.
  • State v. Stewart 827 So. 2d 1277 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
    The supreme court stated: In [ State v. ] Shelton [, ], this Court recognized that Boykin does not require that the entire burden be placed on the prosecution in a recidivism proceeding.
  • State v. Davis 829 So. 2d 554 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    When a predicate conviction was obtained pursuant to a plea of guilty
  • State v. Allen 828 So. 2d 622 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    -780 (La.1993), the scheme for assigning the burden of proof in a habitual offender proceeding was discussed: If the defendant denies the allegations of the bill of information, the burden is on the State to prove the existence of the prior guilty pleas and that defendant was represented by counsel when they were
  • State v. Kerwin 821 So. 2d 28 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
  • State v. George 829 So. 2d 440 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    reviewed the jurisprudence concerning the burden of proof in habitual offender proceedings and found it proper to assign a burden of proof to a defendant who contests the validity of his guilty plea.
  • State v. Sewell 811 So. 2d 140 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    This court discussed the scheme for assigning the burden of proof in a habitual offender proceeding, as follows: If the defendant denies the allegations of the bill of information, the burden is on the State to prove the existence of the prior guilty pleas and that defendant was represented by counsel when they were taken.
  • State v. Brooks 807 So. 2d 1090 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    When a prior conviction resulted from a guilty plea, and the defendant denies the allegations in the multiple offender bill of information, -780 (La.1993), outlines the state's burden of proof.
  • State v. Howard 805 So. 2d 1247 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    The Louisiana Supreme Court adopted a
  • State v. Lee 807 So. 2d 359 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    the Louisiana Supreme Court discussed the state's burden of proof in a habitual offender proceeding: If the defendant denies the allegations of the bill of information, the burden is on the State to prove the existence of the prior guilty pleas and that defendant was represented by counsel when they we
  • State v. Hopson 803 So. 2d 1090 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
  • State v. Porter 806 So. 2d 64 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    reviewed the jurisprudence concerning the burden of proof in habitual offender proceedings and found it proper to assign a burden of proof to a defendant who contests the validity of his guilty plea.
  • State v. Mims 806 So. 2d 760 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Parker 818 So. 2d 85 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
  • State v. Pierce 799 So. 2d 732 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    In State v. Carlos, 98-1366 (La.7/7/99); , are applicable to multiple offender DWI cases.
  • State v. Kelly 800 So. 2d 978 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
  • State v. O'NEAL 795 So. 2d 1292 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
  • State v. Elledge 797 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    | ¡¡Discussion With regard to the burden required of a defendant challenging the State’s use of a prior conviction as a predicate offense, the Louisiana Supreme Court, in State v. Carlos, 98-1366, 6-8 (La.7/7/99) -60 , explained: *173 In [], this Court recognized that Boykin does not require that the entire burden be placed on the prosecution in a recidivism proceeding....
  • State v. Crayton 796 So. 2d 87 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
  • State v. Johnson 796 So. 2d 201 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    -780 (La.1993), a case predating La.C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Hill 796 So. 2d 127 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    -780 (La.1993), a case predating La.C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Coston 800 So. 2d 907 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    1709 , 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969) (holding that a court must advise a defendant of his privilege against self-incrimination, his right to a jury trial, and his right to confront his accusers before he pleads guilty)
  • State v. Rodrigue 795 So. 2d 488 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    In State v. Carlos, supra , the Louisiana Supreme Court extended the burden-shifting principles applicable to multiple offenders, -780 (La.
  • State v. Morris 798 So. 2d 1004 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Flagg 792 So. 2d 133 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Jones 792 So. 2d 117 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    -780 (La.1993), the Supreme Court stated: If the defendant denies the allegations of the bill of information, the burden is on the State to prove the existence of the prior guilty pleas and that defendant was represented by counsel when they were taken.
  • State v. Manson 791 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Knight 794 So. 2d 33 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    -780 (La.1993), the Supreme Court stated: If the defendant denies the allegations of the bill of information, the burden is on the State to prove the existence of the prior guilty pleas and that defendant was represented by counsel when they were taken.
  • State v. Baudier 789 So. 2d 696 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    1709 , 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969)
  • State v. Wallace 788 So. 2d 578 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
  • Distinguished State v. Williams 788 So. 2d 515 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    Defendant argues that Rolen is distinguishable from the instant case because, defendant has the burden of proving an irregularity in the taking of a prior guilty plea, and "is in the predicament of having to attempt to gather evidence relating to his guilty pleas nearly twenty years earlier" to establish such irregularity.
  • State v. Harris 787 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    -780 (La.1993), the Supreme Court stated: If the defendant denies the allegations of the bill of information, the burden is on the State to prove the existence of the prior guilty pleas and that defendant was represented by counsel when they were taken.
  • State v. Roth 786 So. 2d 768 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    In State v. Carlos, 98-1366 (La.7/7/99), , to the recidivist provisions of the DWI statute.
  • State v. Gay 784 So. 2d 714 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
  • State v. Anderson 784 So. 2d 666 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    In State v. Carlos, 98-1366, pp. 6-7 (La.7/7/99), , are applicable to the recidivist provisions of the DWI statute.
  • State v. Haywood 783 So. 2d 568 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Monroe 784 So. 2d 29 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    Defendant also argues that the Boykin form associated with that predicate felony had a different case number on it, and that the state did not furnish a