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. Reed, 653 So. 2d 1176.

458 citing documents.

  • State v. Thomas 983 So. 2d 943 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
    His or her brief must contain "`a detailed and reviewable assessment for both the defendant and the appellate court of whether the appeal is worth pursuing in the first place.'" Jyles , 96-2669 at p. 3, 704 So.2d at 242 (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981, p. 1 (La.4/28/95), (per curiam)).
  • State v. Lewis 982 So. 2d 873 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
    4 Cir.1990), sanctioned by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Mouton, 95-981 (La.4/28/95), ( per curiam ), adopted for use by this Court in State v. Bradford, 95-929 (La.App.
  • State v. Jones 978 So. 2d 1236 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    See Anders, supra; State v. Mouton, 1995-0981 (La.04/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Defrene 980 So. 2d 31 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
    In State v. Jyles, 96-2669, p. 3 (La.12/12/97), (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), (per curiam)) the Court explained counsel must "review not only the procedural history of the case and the evidence presented at trial but must also provide [.
  • State v. Trufant 980 So. 2d 29 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    4 Cir. 1990), sanctioned by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Mouton, 95-981 (La.4/28/95), (per curiam), adopted for use by this Court in State v. Bradford, 95-929 (La.App.
  • State v. Dufrene 980 So. 2d 31 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    In State v. Jyles, 96-2669, p. 3 (La.12/12/97), (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), (per curiam)) the Court explained counsel must “review not only the procedural history of the case and the evidence presented at trial but must also provide [...
  • State v. Franks 975 So. 2d 836 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), .
  • State v. Hawthorne 973 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
    See Anders, supra; State v. Mouton, 1995-0981 (La.04/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Moore 969 So. 2d 799 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.04/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Butler 960 So. 2d 1208 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Jones 954 So. 2d 187 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ; State v. Matthews, 41,047 (La.App.2d Cir.6/28/06), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Rasco 946 So. 2d 275 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.04/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Ronald James Alexander La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
  • State v. Dillon 947 So. 2d 86 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    Jyles, 704 So.2d at 242 (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ).
  • State v. Thompson 942 So. 2d 698 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.04/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Sullivan 939 So. 2d 516 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.04/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Matthews 935 So. 2d 775 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.04/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Sweat 926 So. 2d 779 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Batton 920 So. 2d 958 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.04/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • In Re Elloie 921 So. 2d 882 La. 2006
    [21] See State v. Sprint Communications Co., L.P., 96-3094 p. 5 (La.2/7/97)
  • State v. Williams 914 So. 2d 141 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Cole 900 So. 2d 15 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    Jyles, 96-2669 at 3, 704 So.2d at 242 (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981, p. 2 (La.4/28/95), ) (per curiam).
  • State v. Leonard 892 So. 2d 66 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    ply with Jyles , appellate counsel must not only review the procedural history of the case and the evidence presented at trial, but his brief must contain "`a detailed and reviewable assessment for both the defendant and the appellate court of whether the appeal is worth pursuing in the first place.'" Jyles , 96-2669 at p. 3, 704 So.2d at 242 , quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981, p. 2 (La.4/28/95), (per curiam).
  • State ex rel. Cook v. State 884 So. 2d 593 La. 2004
    If appointed counsel, after a review of the record, finds no basis for assigning error on appeal, he or she may follow the procedures set out in State v. Jyles, 96-2669 (La.12/12/97), , State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), (La.App.
  • State v. White 867 So. 2d 981 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.04/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Willis 868 So. 2d 237 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2004
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967); State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ; (La.App.
  • State v. Pearson 861 So. 2d 283 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    4 Cir.1990), approved by State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), , and adopted by this Court in State v. Bradford, 95-929, 95-930 (La.App.
  • State v. Sanders 861 So. 2d 589 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    See also, State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.1995), .
  • State v. Anderson 807 So. 2d 956 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
    Jyles, 704 So.2d at 242 (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ).
  • State v. Jordan 802 So. 2d 933 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    omply with Jyles , appellate counsel not only must review the procedural history of the case and the evidence presented at trial, but also the appellate counsel’s brief must contain “a detailed and reviewable assessment for both the defendant and the appellate court of whether the appeal is worth pursuing in the first place.” Jyles, 704 So.2d at 242 (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ).
  • State v. Jones 799 So. 2d 772 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2001
    `a detailed and reviewable assessment for both the defendant and the appellate court of whether the appeal is worth pursuing in the first place.'" Jyles, 704 So.2d at 242 , (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-981, p. 2 (La.4/28/95); ).
  • State v. Christoff 788 So. 2d 660 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    4 Cir.1990), approved by State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), , and adopted by this Court in State v. Bradford, 95-929, 95-930 (La.App.
  • State v. Fox 784 So. 2d 24 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 1990), approved by State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), , and adopted by this Court in State v. Bradford, 95-929, 95-930 (La.App.
  • State v. Washington 782 So. 2d 639 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    Jyles, supra, at 242 (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ).
  • State v. Washington 782 So. 2d 639 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    o comply with Jyles , appellate counsel not only must review the procedural history of the case and the evidence presented at trial, but also the appellate counsel’s brief must contain “a detailed and reviewable assessment for both the defendant and the appellate court of whether the appeal is worth pursuing in the first place.” Jyles, supra, at 242 (quoting State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), ).
  • State v. Mims 769 So. 2d 44 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
    1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), as interpreted by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Mouton, 95-0981, p. 2 (La.4/28/95), .
  • State v. Nguyen 760 So. 2d 1278 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    See also, State v. Mowton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), .
  • State v. Courtney 761 So. 2d 112 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
    4 Cir. 1990), and the Louisiana Supreme Court approved it in State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95); .
  • State v. Jordan 747 So. 2d 196 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
    The procedure was approved by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Mouton, 95-981 (La.4/28/95); .
  • State v. Jackson 746 So. 2d 698 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    See also State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), .
  • State v. Watts 746 So. 2d 58 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    NOTES [1] The brief filed by counsel must review not only the procedural history of the case and the evidence presented at trial but must also provide, as did the advocate's brief in State v. Mouton, 95-0981, p. 2 (La.4/28/95), , 1177, "a detailed and reviewable assessment for both the defendant and the appellate court of whether the appeal is worth pursuing in the first place."
  • State v. Edgerson 742 So. 2d 948 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    a detailed and reviewable assessment for both the defendant and the appellate court of whether the appeal is worth pursuing in the first place.” See also, State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.1995), .
  • State v. Rankin 741 So. 2d 176 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1999
    4th Cir.1990); and State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), .
  • State v. Brown 738 So. 2d 126 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
    a detailed and reviewable assessment for both the defendant and the appellate court of whether the appeal is worth pursuing in the first place.” See also State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.1995), .
  • State v. Bagemehl 737 So. 2d 228 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    See also State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), .
  • State v. Larrivere 733 So. 2d 703 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999
    App. 4 Cir.1990), and the Louisiana Supreme Court approved it in State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95); .
  • State v. Riley 731 So. 2d 409 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
    1989), and on a civil case, State v. Sprint Communications Co., L.P.
  • State v. Reynolds 716 So. 2d 485 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
    In State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), , the Supreme Court sanctioned the procedures outlined in State v. Benjamin.
  • State v. Chisley 718 So. 2d 537 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1998
    See State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.1995), .
  • State v. Scott 709 So. 2d 339 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
    See State v. Mouton, 95-0981 (La.4/28/95), .