Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Jackson, 608 So. 2d 949.

53 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Sean Patrick Greene La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. Michael Edwin Vice La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
art. 716(F).1 In Weathersby, 29 So.3d at 501(alteration in original), the supreme court stated: Secondly, “[t]he prosecutor’s witness list generally is not discoverable in the absence of extraordinary circumstances.”
State Of Louisiana v. Kevin Dale Daigle La. 2022
State Of Louisiana v. David Brown La. 2022
State v. Dressner 255 So. 3d 537 La. 2018
See State v. Jackson , , 954 (La.
State v. Allen 247 So. 3d 179 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
In State v. Jackson , (La.
State of Louisiana v. Jeffrey Clark 220 So. 3d 583 La. 2016
310 , 136 L.Ed.2d 227 (1996); (La.
State of Louisiana v. Robert Leroy McCoy 218 So. 3d 535 La. 2016
art. 795; (11) the trial court erred in failing to give a “lesser- included offense” instruction; (12) the trial court erred in permitting “untested, unnoticed, unadjudicated act evidence” at the penalty phase, (La.
State of Louisiana v. Marcus Donte Reed 200 So. 3d 291 La. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Robert Glen Coleman 188 So. 3d 174 La. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Lamondre Tucker 181 So. 3d 590 La. 2015
State of Louisiana v. Eldridge Tezano, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Weathersby, 09-2407, p. 2 (La.3/12/10), -19 (La.1982)
State v. Garcia 108 So. 3d 1 La. 2012
State v. Odenbaugh 82 So. 3d 215 La. 2011
State v. Harper 53 So. 3d 1263 La. 2010
State v. Weathersby, 09-2407, p. 2 (La.3/12/10), ; *1271 -19 (La.
State v. Weathersby 29 So. 3d 499 La. 2010
Secondly, “[t]he prosecutor’s witness list generally is not discoverable in the absence of extraordinary circumstances.”
State v. Bordelon 33 So. 3d 842 La. 2009
Artecona and LeBourgeois and the Uniform Capital Sentence Investigation Report is unexplained and unresolved but has no material bearing on our Rule 28 review because jurors were not in any event informed of the juvenile adjudication (if it occurred), , 956-57 *871 (La.l992)(juvenile adjudications of delinquency for felony-grade acts admissible as character and propensity in capital sentencing hearings), and we will assume that defendant, in fact, had no prior serious juvenile record.
State v. Draughn 950 So. 2d 583 La. 2007
this court held that the state may introduce evidence of unadjudicated and unrelated criminal conduct in the penalty phase of a capital trial once the trial judge has determined: "(1) the evidence of defendant's connection with commission of the unrelated crimes is clear and convincing, (2) the proffered ev
State v. Allen 913 So. 2d 788 La. 2005
Indeed, specifically limited "the evidence supporting a prior conviction to the document certifying the fact of conviction and to the testimony of the victim or of any eyewitness to the crime."
State v. Manning 885 So. 2d 1044 La. 2004
this Court declared "evidence of convictions of serious unrelated crimes is extremely relevant to the character and propensities of the defendant."
State v. Williams 839 So. 2d 348 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Wright 834 So. 2d 974 La. 2002
the Court granted pre-trial writs to establish limitations on the admissibility of unrelated and unadjudicated criminal conduct in capital sentencing hearings.
State v. Ball 824 So. 2d 1089 La. 2002
[14] the State also sought to introduce the transcribed trial testimony of one of the victims of that robbery, Salvador Campagna, who had died in the intervening 20 years.
State v. Smith 793 So. 2d 1199 La. 2001
State v. Hobley 752 So. 2d 771 La. 1999
-56 (La.1992), to evidence of conduct that involves violence against the person of the victim and for which crime the period of limitation for instituting prosecution has not run at the time of the indictment of the accused for the first degree murder.
State v. Evans 748 So. 2d 1171 La. 1999
If the state wants to introduce this evidence in the penalty phase, trial judge is ordered to conduct a
State v. Hampton 750 So. 2d 867 La. 1999
the court granted pre-trial writs to establish limitations on admissibility of unrelated and unadjudicated criminal conduct in capital sentencing hearings.
State v. Howard 751 So. 2d 783 La. 1999
Defendant shows that the state relied upon his 1993 armed robbery conviction, from Cobb County, Georgia, as an aggravating circumstance, because the conviction was, in fact, a juvenile adjudication.
State v. Castleberry 758 So. 2d 749 La. 1999
See also State v. Comeaux, 93-2729 (La.7/1/97), ; State v. Connolly, 96-1680 (La.7/1/97)
State v. Brumfield 737 So. 2d 660 La. 1998
State v. Cooks 720 So. 2d 637 La. 1998
State v. Tyler 723 So. 2d 939 La. 1998
1719 , 80 L.Ed.2d 191 (1984); La.Code Crim.
State v. Letulier 750 So. 2d 784 La. 1998
State v. Langley 711 So. 2d 651 La. 1998
(trial judge to determine relevance of rebuttal evidence)
State v. Williams 708 So. 2d 703 La. 1998
As an initial matter, the record reveals that when presenting evidence of the Cortana Mall robberies, which "specifically prohibit[s] evidence of the original charge when the conviction is for a lesser offense."
State v. Robertson 712 So. 2d 8 La. 1998
State v. Jackson /Assignment of Error 7 when defendant's conviction for unauthorized entry of an inhabited dwelling was introduced at the penalty phase.
State v. Comeaux 699 So. 2d 16 La. 1997
[1] The principal issues are (1) whether the evidence of unrelated and unadjudicated criminal conduct presented by the prosecutor in the case-in-chief in the penalty phase, injected an arbitrary factor into the proceeding in violation of defendant's due process rights, and (2) whether the execution of an offender who is both young and mentally retarded violates the prohibition against excessive punishment in the Louisiana Constitution.
State v. Connolly 700 So. 2d 810 La. 1997
*820 953 (La.1992); La.C.Cr.P.
State v. Hart 691 So. 2d 651 La. 1997
State v. Hamilton 681 So. 2d 1217 La. 1996
-956 (La.1992), in which this court limited unadjudicated crimes evidence to "that which involves violence against the person of the victim" and "to that conduct for which the period of limitation for instituting prosecution had not run at the time of the indictment of the accused for the first degree murder for w
State v. Tart 672 So. 2d 116 La. 1996
Admission of Evidence of Unadjudicated Crimes: Assignment of Error # 5
State v. Sepulvado 672 So. 2d 158 La. 1996
State v. Miller 670 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
State v. Sanders 648 So. 2d 1272 La. 1994
Defendant argues that the presentation of evidence of the original charge is a [15] which "specifically prohibit[s] evidence of the original charge when the conviction is for a lesser offense."
State v. Jones 639 So. 2d 1144 La. 1994
State v. Davis 637 So. 2d 1012 La. 1994
State v. Langley 639 So. 2d 211 La. 1994
State v. Langley 635 So. 2d 784 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
The per curiam opinion rendered in State v. Durham, 94-534
State v. Durham 634 So. 2d 848 La. 1994
State v. Bourque 636 So. 2d 254 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1994
In [ State v.] Jackson [ ], this court imposed restrictions on this type of evidence "in order to insure that due process is not violated by the injection of arbitrary factors into the jury's deliberations and to prevent a confusing or unmanageable series of mini-trials of unrelated and unadjudicated conduct during the sentencing hea