DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Martin, 645 So. 2d 190.

180 citing documents.

  • State v. Magee 103 So. 3d 285 La. 2012
    The admission of “gruesome photographs is not reversible error unless it is clear that their probative value is substantially outweighed by their prejudicial effect.” State v. Broaden, 99-2124, p. 23 (La.2/21/01), , quoting State v. Martin, 93-0285, pp. 14-15 (La.10/17/94), .
  • State v. Johnson 91 So. 3d 1213 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State of Louisiana v. Russell Gene Ware, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94)
  • State v. Ware 80 So. 3d 593 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94); .
  • State v. Patton 68 So. 3d 1209 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    See State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State v. Jacobs 67 So. 3d 535 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    Finally, although the armed robbery evidence in the instant case was prejudicial to defendant, the Louisiana Supreme Court has recognized that “all relevant evidence providing proof of the charged crime is prejudicial, and often the degree of probative value increases the degree of prejudice.” State v. Martin, 93-0285, p. 13 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State of Louisiana v. Ricky Joseph Langley La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
  • State v. Langley 61 So. 3d 747 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    See State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), ; (1982).
  • State v. Collins 62 So. 3d 268 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94)
  • State v. Vincent 56 So. 3d 408 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    See State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), .
  • State v. Wilson 32 So. 3d 1152 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
    See State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State v. Ford 24 So. 3d 249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    4 Cir. 2/4/98) , -79 (on rehearing); See also State v. Martin, 93-2085 (La.10/17/94), (“The decision to grant or deny a motion for continuance lies within the wide discretion of the trial court.”).
  • State v. Bordelon 33 So. 3d 842 La. 2009
    10/17/94), ; State v. Rault, 44
  • State v. Harris 20 So. 3d 1121 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    P. art. 707; State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), ; State v. Dooley, 38,763 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Thornton Gross La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
  • State v. Gross 16 So. 3d 551 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    This is because the “touchstone is trustworthiness,” and “corroboration is an effective test of the trustworthiness of a person’s inculpatory statements.” State v. Martin, 93-285 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State v. Reeves 11 So. 3d 1031 La. 2009
  • State v. VanBuren 3 So. 3d 552 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    In State v. Martin, 93-2085, p. 10-11 (La.10/17/94), , the Court stated that “[t]he decision to grant or deny a continuance lies within the wide discretion of the trial court.” In State v. Johnson, 96-0950 (La.App.
  • State v. Otero 3 So. 3d 34 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    However, “much credit should be accorded to the good sense and fair-mindedness of the jurors who have seen the evidence and heard the arguments, and have been instructed repeatedly by the trial judge that arguments of counsel are not evidence.” State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), .
  • State v. Chism 3 So. 3d 41 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    “This trustworthiness approach provides the necessary minimum assurance against convictions based on untrue confessions.” State v. Martin, 93-0285, p. 8 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State v. Duhon 997 So. 2d 904 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    State v. Koon, 96-1208, p. 34 (La.5/20/97), ; State v. Martin, 93-0285, p. 14 (La.10/17/94), .
  • State v. Holmes 5 So. 3d 42 La. 2008
    716 , 133 L.Ed.2d 670 (1996); State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State v. Morris 996 So. 2d 306 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    P. art. 712; *313 State v. Martin, XXXX-XXXX (La.10/17/94), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Clinton B. Schneider, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    State v. Martin, 1993-285 p. 18 (La.10/17/94), cert.
  • State v. Schneider 981 So. 2d 107 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    State v. Martin, 1993-285 p. 18 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State v. Ford 976 So. 2d 321 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    art. 712; State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), ; State v. Spears, supra ; State v. Dooley, supra .
  • State v. Lee 976 So. 2d 109 La. 2008
    See, e.g., State v. Harris, 01-2730 (La.1/19/05), ; State v. Clark, 02-1463 (La.6/27/03), ; State v. Wright, 01-0322 (La.12/4/02), ; State v. Casey, 99-0023 (La.1/26/00), ; State v. Connolly, 96-1680 (La.7/1/97), ; State v. Comeaux, 93-2729 (La.7/1/97), ; State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), ; State v. Jones, 474
  • State of Louisiana v. Robert Thomas Smith La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
  • State v. Smith 969 So. 2d 694 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    See also State v. Koon, 96-1208, (La.5/20/97); ; State v. Maxie, 93-2158, (La.4/10/95); ; State v. Martin, 93-0285, (La.10/17/94); .
  • State v. Frank 957 So. 2d 724 La. 2007
    See State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), ; (1982).
  • State v. Blank 955 So. 2d 90 La. 2007
    Cf. State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), -98 (Evidence that defendant had prior rape conviction and had declared that "he wasn't going back to prison for nobody" admissible to show motive and specific intent to kill victim during perpetration of aggravated rape).
  • Castillo v. Clerk of Court for the 29th Judicial District Court of St. Charles Parish 951 So. 2d 1258 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
    State v. Martin, 93-2085 (La.10/17/94), ; cert.
  • State v. Draughn 950 So. 2d 583 La. 2007
    State v. Martin, 1993-285 p. 18 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State of Louisiana v. Nathan Stringer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    State v. Koon, 96-1208, p. 34 (La.5/20/97), (orig.hrg); State v. Maxie, 93-2158 (La.4/10/95), n. 8, citing State v. Martin, 93-0285, p. 14 (La.10/17/94), cert.
  • State v. Stringer 949 So. 2d 464 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    State v. Koon, 96-1208, p. 34 (La.5/20/97), (orig.hrg); State v. Maxie, 93-2158 (La.4/10/95), n. 8 , citing State v. Martin, 93-0285, p. 14 (La.10/17/94), ; (La.
  • State v. Spears 940 So. 2d 135 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    art. 712; State v. Martin, XXXX-XXXX (La.10/17/94), ; State v. Dooley, supra ; State v. Gipson, 28,113 (La.App.
  • State v. Tate 938 So. 2d 206 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
    Standard of Review In State v. Martin, 93-2085 (La.10/17/94), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated that “[t]he decision to grant or deny a continuance lies within the wide discretion of the trial court.” (Emphasis added.)
  • State v. Schnyder 937 So. 2d 396 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), -196 .
  • State v. Roberson 929 So. 2d 789 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), .
  • State v. Moore 920 So. 2d 334 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    See State v. Seiss, supra , and State v. Martin, 93-285 (La.10/17/94), , wherein the Supreme Court of Louisiana stated that even if it would have been prudent for the trial judge to have granted a continuance, the denial of the motion was not an abuse of the trial judge's wide discretion.
  • State v. Persley 918 So. 2d 491 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    P. art. 712; State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), ; State v. Gipson, 28,113 (La.
  • State v. George 908 So. 2d 79 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    876 (1941); State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State v. Condley 904 So. 2d 881 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    192 , 151 L.Ed.2d 135 (2001) (citing State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State v. Manning 885 So. 2d 1044 La. 2004
    State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), , cert.
  • State v. Dooley 882 So. 2d 731 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    P. art. 712; State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), ; State v. Gipson, 28,113 (La.App.2d Cir.06/26/96), .
  • State v. Brewer 880 So. 2d 1005 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    In State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), , 200 cert.
  • State v. Robinson 874 So. 2d 66 La. 2004
    See State v. Divers, 94-0756, pp. 3-4 (La.10/11/96), ; State v. Martin, 93-0285, pp. 3-5 (La.10/17/94), -94 ; rev'd after remand
  • State v. Genter 872 So. 2d 552 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
    In support, he cites State v. Martin, 93-0285, p. 7 (La.10/17/94), , where the Court stated: The purpose of the corroboration rule is to test the reliability of a confession and thereby prevent an erroneous conviction based solely on an untrue confession.
  • State v. Legrand 864 So. 2d 89 La. 2004
    See State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/95), ; (1982).
  • State v. Fernandez 864 So. 2d 764 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    See, State v. Martin, 93-285, p. 18 (La.10/17/94), , cert.