Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Van Winkle, 658 So. 2d 198.

94 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Steve Derozal Williams La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2026
  • State of Louisiana v. Jimmie Dixon, Jr. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
  • State of Louisiana Versus Marshae Jones La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2024
    6/30/95), State v. Young, 20-01041 (La.
  • State Of Louisiana v. Margaret Camaille Stockstill La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
  • State of Louisiana v. Sterling Terrel Brown La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
  • State of Louisiana v. Darrell Clark La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
  • State of Louisiana v. Willie Derrick Jackson La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
  • State Of Louisiana v. Kevin Abimael Guzman La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2022
  • State of Louisiana v. Jerald Dewayne Smith La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2022
  • State Of Louisiana v. Joseph Andrew St. Romain, Jr. La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
  • State Of Louisiana v. Jerrell Alexander La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2021
  • State Of Louisiana v. Michael Young La. 2021
  • State Of Louisiana v. Kirby Thomas La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
  • State v. Ford 275 So. 3d 404 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    06/30/95), , 202 ; State v. Nixon , 17-1582 (La.
  • State of Louisiana Versus Derrick A. Ford, Jr. La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2019
    06/30/95), State v. Nixon, 17-1582 (La.
  • State v. Barnett 267 So. 3d 209 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
  • State v. Williams 265 So. 3d 902 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    6/30/95), , 201-202, the Louisiana Supreme Court discussed a defendant's right to present a defense: A criminal defendant has the constitutional right to present a defense.
  • State v. Nixon 250 So. 3d 273 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
    6/30/95), , 202 ; State v. Gremillion , , 1078 (La.
  • State v. Williams 240 So. 3d 355 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
  • State v. Magee 243 So. 3d 151 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
  • State of Louisiana v. Corlious C. Dyson AKA Corlious Corall Dyson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
    6/30/95), Defendant points out that the supreme court “stated that evidentiary rules may not supersede the fundamental right to present a defense.
  • State v. Dyson 220 So. 3d 785 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    6/30/95), , Defendant points out that the supreme court “stated that evidentiary rules may not supersede the fundamental right to present a defense.
  • State v. Calderon 220 So. 3d 830 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
  • State of Louisiana v. Jeffrey Clark 220 So. 3d 583 La. 2016
    6/30/95), -02 (holding that the exclusion of hearsay evidence suggesting that the defendant’s roommate killed the victim was reversible error); (La.
  • State v. Scott 197 So. 3d 298 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), -202 .
  • State v. Griffin 176 So. 3d 561 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    State v. Juniors, 03-2425, pp. 44-45 (La.6/29/05), -26 (citing State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95), )
  • State v. Roe 151 So. 3d 838 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), -202 .
  • State v. Williams 137 So. 3d 832 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    4 Cir. 9/27/00), (citing State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95), ).
  • State v. Cope 137 So. 3d 151 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
    1920 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1019 (1967); State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95), .
  • State v. Ross 137 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    4 Cir. 12/30/08), (quoting State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, pp. 5-6 (La.6/30/95), -02 ).
  • State v. Smoot 134 So. 3d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95), .
  • State v. Scott 131 So. 3d 501 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), -202 .
  • State v. Marcelin 116 So. 3d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    (Citation omitted) (quoting State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), -02 ).
  • State v. Jackson 115 So. 3d 1155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), .
  • State v. Thomas 106 So. 3d 665 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    The Louisiana Supreme Court said, in State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), , 201-202: A criminal defendant has the constitutional right to present a defense.
  • State v. Hugle 104 So. 3d 598 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    4 Cir. 10/25/06), , quoting State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Byran Louis Fogleman La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
  • State v. Fogleman 98 So. 3d 964 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    Const, art. 1, § 16; State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95), .
  • State v. Everett 96 So. 3d 605 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    State v. Juniors, 03-2425, pp. 44-45 (La.6/29/05), -26 , citing State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95)
  • State v. Brown 86 So. 3d 726 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    1920 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1019 (1967); State v. Van Winkle, 1994-0947 (La.06/30/95), ; State v. Johnson, 41,428 (La.App.2d13 Cir.09/27/06), .
  • State v. Franklin 87 So. 3d 860 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    5 Cir. 4/26/05) , -89 (citing State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95), ; ).
  • State v. Rubens 83 So. 3d 30 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), -202 .
  • State v. Jacobs 67 So. 3d 535 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    2142, 2146 , 90 L.Ed.2d 636 (1986); State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Jonathan Edward Boyer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    This court set forth the following discussion of the applicable case law: the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: A criminal defendant has the constitutional right to present a defense.
  • State v. Boyer 56 So. 3d 1119 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    This court set forth the following discussion of the applicable case law: the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: A criminal defendant has the constitutional right to present a defense.
  • State v. Fernandez 50 So. 3d 219 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947 (La.6/30/95), ; see also Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 , 93 S.Ct.
  • State v. Dressner 45 So. 3d 127 La. 2010
    5 Cir. 3/16/94), (“The predicate [for assessing the evidentiary weight of a statement] should not provide another opportunity to attack the admissibility of the statement.”), rev’d 94-0947, p. 8 (La.6/30/95), (“Ms. Van Winkle argues the District Court erred in prohibiting her from presenting evidence as to her mental state when she gave the various statements....
  • State v. McMillan 43 So. 3d 297 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    1920 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1019 (1967); State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), .
  • State v. TRUVIA 29 So. 3d 669 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    1920 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1019 (1967); State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, p. 5 (La.6/30/95), .
  • State v. Johnson 28 So. 3d 1167 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    In State v. Van Winkle, 94-0947, pp. 5-6 (La.6/30/95), -202 , the Court discussed a defendant’s right to present a defense: A criminal defendant has the constitutional right to present a defense.