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. Duncan, 667 So. 2d 1141.

56 citing documents.

  • State Of Louisiana v. Don Patrick Barrington, Jr. La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2023
    App. 1 Cir. 12/ 15/ 95), ( en Banc per curiam).
  • State Of Louisiana v. Kevin Hamburg La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
    App, 1st Cir. 12/ 15/ 95), ( en Banc per curiam).
  • State Of Louisiana v. Andre D. Coleman La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
    App. 1st Cir. 12/ 15/ 95), ( en banc) ( per curiam).
  • State Of Louisiana v. James Simmons, Jr. La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
    App. 1st Cir. 12/ 15/ 95), - 43 ( en banc per curiam).
  • State Of Louisiana v. Gary Scully La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
    App. 1st Cir. 12/ 15/ 95), ( en Banc per curiam).
  • State Of Louisiana v. Lenard Andrew Turpin La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
    App. 1" Cir. 12/ 15/ 95), ( en bane per curiam).
  • State Of Louisiana v. Daniel T. Hamilton La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
    App. 1 st Cir. 12/ 15/ 95), ( en banc per curiam).
  • State Of Louisiana v. Steven Staggs La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    App. 1st Cir. 12/ 15/ 95), ( en Banc per curiam).
  • State Of Louisiana v. Jeremy James Griner La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    App. 1 Cir. 12/ 15/ 95), ( en banc) ( per curiam), we would not consider an excessive sentence argument.
  • State of Louisiana v. Rusty Leboeuf La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en bane per curiam).
  • State v. Duhon 270 So. 3d 597 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), , 1143 (en banc, per curiam).
  • State v. Lutz 235 So. 3d 1114 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    See also State v. Duncan, 94-1563 (La, App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. White 228 So. 3d 213 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    App. 1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Scott 228 So. 3d 207 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam), we would not consider an excessive sentence argument.
  • State v. Campbell 217 So. 3d 1197 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    1 Cir. 12/15/96) , (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Scott 195 So. 3d 1209 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    1st Cir.12/15/95), (en banc) (per curiam).
  • State v. Law 189 So. 3d 1164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    1 Cir. 12/15/95) , (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Ferguson 181 So. 3d 120 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    1st Cir.12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Bell 169 So. 3d 417 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    1 Cir. 12/15/95) , (en banc, per curiam).
  • State v. Dawson 154 So. 3d 574 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    1 Cir. 12/15/95) , (en banc per curiam); -59 (La.
  • State v. Lavy 142 So. 3d 1000 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    1st Cir.12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Welch 115 So. 3d 490 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    1st Cir.12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Loper 48 So. 3d 1263 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    1st Cir.12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Panter 30 So. 3d 283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    App. 1 Cir. 12/15/95), ( en banc per curiam ).
  • State v. Negron 25 So. 3d 249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Griffin 24 So. 3d 1030 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    App. 1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Dupas 17 So. 3d 518 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam), we would not consider an excessive sentence argument.
  • State v. Olden 11 So. 3d 1243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Pierre 5 So. 3d 1059 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Hotard 994 So. 2d 156 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Chittenden 992 So. 2d 593 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Hebert 986 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    App. 1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam); see State v. Bickham, 98-1839, p. 6 (La.
  • State v. Zachary 973 So. 2d 176 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
    App. 1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Adams 966 So. 2d 1247 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
    App. 1st Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Washington 939 So. 2d 557 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
  • State v. Wright 931 So. 2d 432 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
  • State v. Scott 927 So. 2d 441 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Emerson 888 So. 2d 975 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Smith 879 So. 2d 179 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Odom 878 So. 2d 582 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    1st Cir.12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Dilosa 849 So. 2d 657 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    1 Cir. 12/15/95), -43 (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. James 813 So. 2d 659 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Felder 809 So. 2d 360 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    1 Cir. 12/15/95) , (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Mance 797 So. 2d 718 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    1st Cir.12/12/95), (en banc per curiam), and we would not consider the excessive sentence argument.
  • State v. Wilkinson 754 So. 2d 301 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    1st Cir.12/15/95), (en banc per curiam), and we would not consider an excessive sentence argument.
  • State v. Welch 744 So. 2d 64 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    1st Cir.12/15/95) (en banc per curiam); .
  • State v. Bickham 739 So. 2d 887 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    1st Cir.12/15/95); (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Williams 729 So. 2d 1080 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    1 Cir. 12/15/95); (en banc per curiam).
  • State v. Hennis 734 So. 2d 21 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    1st Cir.12/15/95) (en banc per curiam); .
  • State v. Jones 720 So. 2d 52 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
    1 Cir. 12/15/95), (en banc ), I concur in the result.