Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Pierre, 631 So. 2d 427.

134 citing documents.

State v. White 968 So. 2d 901 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ; State v. Tolliver, 35,930 (La.App.
State v. Arnold 970 So. 2d 1067 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), (per curiam) ().
State v. Smith 962 So. 2d 1190 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ; State v. King, 06-554 (La.App.
State v. McFarland 960 So. 2d 1142 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Henderson 958 So. 2d 101 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ; State v. Tolliver, 35,930 (La.App.2d Cir.5/8/02), .
State v. King 951 So. 2d 384 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State of Louisiana v. Darnell Savoy La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. Savoy 931 So. 2d 1207 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94); .
State v. Scroggins 926 So. 2d 64 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Arceneaux 930 So. 2d 44 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), (per curiam) (citation omitted).
State v. Weaver 917 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Lewis 917 So. 2d 583 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Couvillion 910 So. 2d 991 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Robins 915 So. 2d 896 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
“[A]n individual may only be convicted as a principal for those crimes for which he personally has the requisite mental state.” State v. Pierre, 93-0893, p. 2 (La.2/3/94), (per cu-riam).
State v. Carey 901 So. 2d 509 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
State v. Pierre, 93-0893, p. 4 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Bean 899 So. 2d 702 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
See State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), (per curiam).
State v. Hughes 900 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
The Jackson standard "preserves the role of the jury as the fact finder in the case but it does not allow jurors 'to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.'" State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Mitchell 894 So. 2d 1240 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Falkins 880 So. 2d 903 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State of Louisiana v. Levi Joseph Garrick La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
State v. Garrick 879 So. 2d 401 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Garrick 879 So. 2d 401 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Hall 875 So. 2d 996 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State of Louisiana v. Scott Allen Cooper La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
2/3/94), the defendant was charged with second degree murder in connection with the rape of a thirteen-year- old victim.
State v. Cooper 862 So. 2d 512 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
In State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), , the defendant was charged with second degree murder in connection with the rape of a thirteen-year-old victim.
State v. Tumblin 857 So. 2d 1045 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
The Jackson *1049 standard “preserves the role of the jury as the factfinder in the case but it |fidoes not allow jurors ‘to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.’ ” State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Walker 853 So. 2d 746 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Francois 844 So. 2d 1042 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
This standard thus "preserves the role of the jury as the factfinder the case but it does not allow jurors `to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.'" State v. Pierre, 93-0893, p. 5 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Fields 842 So. 2d 316 La. 2003
motive cannot alone provide the basis for determining that one spouse has ‘concerned’ himself or herself in the fraudulent acts of the other spouse simply by reason of their common interests arising from their relational status.”); see also State v. Pierre, 93-0893, p. 4 (La.2/3/94), (“Only those persons who knowingly participate in the planning or execution of a crime are principals ....
State v. Gaspard 841 So. 2d 1021 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
That standard "preserves the role of the jury as the factfinder in the case but it does not allow jurors `to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.'" State v. Pierre, 93-0893 at p. 5 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Green 839 So. 2d 286 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Amin 839 So. 2d 262 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ; State v. Kirkland, 01-425 (La.App.
State v. Dallas 830 So. 2d 1113 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
In State v. Pierre, 93-0893, (La.2/3/94), , our supreme court stated: "[T]hose persons who knowingly participate in the planning or execution of a crime are principals."
State v. Coleman 829 So. 2d 468 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ; State v. Cedrington, 98-253 (La.App.
State v. Allen 828 So. 2d 622 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Collins 826 So. 2d 598 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
The Jackson standard "preserves the role of the jury as the factfinder in the case but it does not allow jurors `to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.'" State v. Pierre, 93-0893, p. 5 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Bridgewater 823 So. 2d 877 La. 2002
That standard "preserves the role of the jury as the factfinder in the case but it does not allow jurors `to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.'" State v. Pierre, 93-0893 at p. 5 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Logan 822 So. 2d 657 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ; State v. Kirkland, supra .
State v. Bouie 817 So. 2d 48 La. 2002
[2] Notably, the trial judge never explained to the defendant that, to prove him guilty of attempted second degree murder, the state was required to prove that the defendant, even as a principal, see State v. Pierre, 93-0895 (La.2/3/94), ; had possessed the requisite specific intent to kill the victim.
State v. Tolliver 818 So. 2d 310 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Hicks 817 So. 2d 192 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
Defendant argues that he did not have the requisite intent to kill the victim and relies on State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Stewart 815 So. 2d 14 La. 2002
See State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ("Only those persons who knowingly participate in the planning or execution of a crime are principals....
State v. Hayes 806 So. 2d 816 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ; State v. Girod, 94-853 (La.App.
State v. Freeman 801 So. 2d 578 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
The supreme court stated in State v. Pierre, 93-0893, p. 4 *582 (La.2/3/94); , 428 that: "[T]hose persons who knowingly participate in the planning or execution of a crime are principals."
State v. Johnson 803 So. 2d 358 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
(La.1980); State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Kirkland 798 So. 2d 263 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ; State v. Cedrington, 98-253 (La.App.
State v. Coleman 792 So. 2d 918 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
5 Cir. 2/10/99) , (citing State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), ).
State v. Price 792 So. 2d 180 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
5 Cir. 2/10/99) , ; State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Hampton 782 So. 2d 1045 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
State v. Pierre, 93-0893, p. 4 (La.2/3/94), .
State v. Palermo 765 So. 2d 1155 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
State v. Pierre, 93-0893, p. 4, ( (La.