DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. George, 661 So. 2d 975.

68 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Harrison Buckner Doyle La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
    10/16/95), State v. Campbell, 97-369 (La.App.
  • State v. Law 189 So. 3d 1164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    .As emphasized by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), , Doyle prohibits only the use of the defendant’s post-arrest silence for impeachment purposes.
  • State v. Duong 148 So. 3d 623 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Adams 142 So. 3d 265 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Parker 141 So. 3d 839 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
    See State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95)
  • State v. Hollins 123 So. 3d 840 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    IsoThis court found no reversible error, relying on the decision by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Triston T. Lyons La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
    As specified by the Louisiana Supreme Court, in State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), “Doyle condemns only „the use for impeachment purposes of (the defendant‟s) silence at the time of arrest and after Miranda warnings.‟ ” The prosecutor may not use the fact of an accused‟s exercise of his constitutional right to remain silent, after he has been advised of this right, sole
  • State of Louisiana v. Israel M. Beverly La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
    10/16/95), State v. Harper, 93-2682 (La.
  • State v. Beverly 93 So. 3d 652 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Harper, 93-2682 (La.11/30/94), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Marlon Roberson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95)
  • State v. Turner 91 So. 3d 426 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    All that is required is that a party make clear, at the time an order of the court is made or sought, the action which he desires the court to take, together with an objection and grounds.” State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Stallworth 11 So. 3d 541 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    In State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), , the prosecutor questioned the arresting officer as to whether the defendant had been read his rights after he was arrested, and then elicited testimony from the officer establishing that the defendant did not make any statements.
  • State v. Longo 8 So. 3d 666 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. McGeorge 977 So. 2d 305 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. LAVIOLETTE 943 So. 2d 527 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 13 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Delco 943 So. 2d 1143 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Young 938 So. 2d 90 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    NOTES [1] State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Lewis 916 So. 2d 294 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Clark 909 So. 2d 1007 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    [3] State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Becnel 904 So. 2d 838 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363 (La.App.
  • State v. Coleman 918 So. 2d 23 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Brown 902 So. 2d 542 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Guillard 902 So. 2d 1061 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. George, 95-0100 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363 (La.App.
  • State v. McCloud 901 So. 2d 498 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Videau 900 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Hensley 900 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    [2] State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363 (La.
  • State v. McGee 894 So. 2d 398 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Jones 891 So. 2d 760 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
    This court found no reversible error, relying on the decision by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Carter 888 So. 2d 928 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Manning 885 So. 2d 1044 La. 2004
    While the State may not introduce new issues or facts or reserve part of its case-in-chief for rebuttal, see State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), , the fact that rebuttal evidence may incidentally strengthen the State's case does not render it inadmissible.
  • State v. Jones 884 So. 2d 582 La. 2004
    State v. George, 95-0110 p. 13 (La.10/116/95), .
  • State v. Crockett 886 So. 2d 1139 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363 (La.App.
  • State v. Kirsch 880 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363 (La.App.
  • State v. McClain 877 So. 2d 1135 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Peden 875 So. 2d 934 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    [3] State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Wiley 880 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Jackson 880 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    [2] State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Stein 874 So. 2d 279 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    10/16/95), ; State v. Conner, 02-363, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Harris 871 So. 2d 599 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. George, 95-110 (La.10.16/95), ; State v. Bolden, 03-0266 (La.
  • State v. Zeringue 862 So. 2d 186 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95)
  • State v. Iverson 855 So. 2d 835 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    In State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), , the supreme court also found the explicit admonition troubling.
  • State v. Fisher 852 So. 2d 1075 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Noil, 01-521, p. 12 (La.App.
  • State v. Bolden 852 So. 2d 1050 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Noil, 01-521, p. 12 (La.App.
  • State v. Bradford 846 So. 2d 880 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    State v. George 95-0110, p. 10 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Price 842 So. 2d 491 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    Defendant cites State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Lee 836 So. 2d 589 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    NOTES [1] State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Noil, 01-521, p. 12 (La.App.
  • State v. Conner 833 So. 2d 396 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    State v. George, 95-0110, p. 6 (La.10/16/95), ; State v. Noil, 01-521, p. 12 (La.App.
  • State v. Ledesma 817 So. 2d 390 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    As specified by the Louisiana Supreme Court, in State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), , " Doyle condemns only `the use for impeachment purposes of (the defendant's) silence at the time of arrest and after Miranda warnings.'" The prosecutor may not use the fact of an accused's exercise of his constitutional right to remain silent, after he has been advised of this right, solely to ascribe a guilty
  • State v. Sellers 818 So. 2d 231 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95), .
  • State v. Matthews 814 So. 2d 619 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    State v. George, 95-0110 (La.10/16/95)