Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Carouthers, 618 So. 2d 880.

32 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Laurie Elkins Richard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
  • State in the Interest of G. J. G. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2020
  • State v. Wells 203 So. 3d 233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
  • State v. Kisack 190 So. 3d 806 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
  • State of Louisiana v. Asa Bentley AKA - Asa N. Bentley La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
  • State v. Bentley 185 So. 3d 254 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
  • State v. Broyard 183 So. 3d 796 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
  • State v. Tucker 170 So. 3d 394 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
  • State v. Hamdan 112 So. 3d 812 La. 2013
    The habitual offender statute “requires Louisiana courts to determine the analogous state crime according to the nature of the act involved, not the penalty provided for the offense in the foreign jurisdiction.” , 59 n. 4 (La.1982).
  • Roger Vestal v. Cynthia D. Kirkland La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
  • State v. Stewart 65 So. 3d 771 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
  • State v. Brooks 48 So. 3d 219 La. 2010
  • State v. Watts 41 So. 3d 625 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State of Louisiana v. Mason N. Godfrey La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
  • State v. Godfrey 32 So. 3d 1020 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Sandoval 32 So. 3d 914 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
  • State v. Grimes 16 So. 3d 418 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • In the Interest of D.M. 928 So. 2d 624 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    and Dev., -82 (La.1993).
  • In Re DM 928 So. 2d 624 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    and Dev., -82 (La.1993).
  • State v. Uloho 875 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. Hennis, 98-665 (La.App.
  • State v. Armstead 832 So. 2d 389 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    3 Cir.1992), vacated on other grounds, the court of appeal found that where nine rocks of cocaine seized in the defendant’s room were used to prove possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, and two other rocks sold to an undercover officer were used to prove distribution of cocaine, no double jeopardy attached because the “same evidence”
  • State v. Frosch 787 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
  • State v. Carr 761 So. 2d 1271 La. 2000
  • State v. Dawson 752 So. 2d 332 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    our Supreme Court previously ruled on the issue of sentence enhancement for convictions from foreign jurisdictions.
  • State v. Harmon 754 So. 2d 986 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
  • State v. Hammond 704 So. 2d 1281 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
    3 Cir.1992), sentence vacated
  • State v. Stelly 693 So. 2d 305 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
    3 Cir.1992), writ granted, vacated on other grounds, this court found that there was enough evidence to establish the defendant exercised dominion and control over drugs where the defendant was present in a hotel room registered in his name while another man sold drugs to an undercover agent.
  • State v. Smith 681 So. 2d 978 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
  • Chevalier v. LH Bossier, Inc. 676 So. 2d 1072 La. 1996
  • State v. Taylor 663 So. 2d 336 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
    3 Cir.1992), sentence vacated
  • City of Baton Rouge v. Ross 654 So. 2d 1311 La. 1995
    3 Cir.1992), vacated on other grounds, the court of appeal found that where nine rocks of cocaine seized in the defendant's room were used to prove possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, and two other rocks sold to an undercover officer were used to prove distribution of cocaine, no double jeopardy attached because the "same evidence"
  • State v. Hodges 651 So. 2d 487 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
    3d Cir.1992), vacated on other grounds