Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Williams, 633 So. 2d 147.

15 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Daniel E. Johnson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
3/11/94), the supreme court addressed a claim that Williams shot his wife accidentally.
State of Louisiana v. Jarrett Andrews La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
3/11/94), (per curiam), the supreme court found defendant’s account of an accidental shooting “so remote and unlikely that it failed to provide jurors a hypothesis of innocence they could not reasonably reject.” Id.
State v. Andrews 265 So. 3d 1078 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
3/11/94), (per curiam), the supreme court found defendant's account of an accidental shooting "so remote and unlikely that it failed to provide jurors a hypothesis of innocence they could not reasonably reject."
State of Louisiana v. Lamondre Tucker 181 So. 3d 590 La. 2015
3/11/94), (“Motive is not an essential element of murder, but a lack of motive may properly be considered as a circumstance mitigating against specific intent.”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
State v. Caliste 125 So. 3d 8 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
| in“Motive is not an essential element of murder, but ‘a lack of motive may properly be considered as a circumstance mitigating against specific intent.’ ”
State v. Adams 966 So. 2d 1247 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. David Lee Leger La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
State v. Leger 907 So. 2d 739 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
State v. Williams, 93-2707, p. 4 (La.3/11/94), ( ).
State v. Severin 885 So. 2d 609 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
However, the Louisiana Supreme Court *618 has explained that absence of proof of motive "`may properly be considered as a circumstance mitigating against specific intent.'" State v. Williams, 93-2707, p. 4 (La.3/11/94), ().
State v. Reed 809 So. 2d 1261 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
In State v. Williams, 93-2707 (La.3/11/94); , the supreme court found Defendant's account of an accidental shooting "so remote and unlikely that it failed to provide jurors a hypothesis of innocence they could not reasonably reject."
State v. Hansbro 796 So. 2d 185 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
State v. Williams, 93-2707 (La.3/11/94), .
State v. Morris 770 So. 2d 908 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
See State v. Williams, 93-2707, p. 4 (La.3/11/94), .
State v. Wommack 770 So. 2d 365 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
State v. Williams, 93-2707, p. 4 (La.3/11/94)
Landry v. Roberson Advertising Service, Inc. 660 So. 2d 194 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
See State v. Williams, 93-K-2707 (La.1994), .
State v. Long 643 So. 2d 132 La. 1994