Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. McArthur, 719 So. 2d 1037.

40 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Stephen Douglas Cormier La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
In Williams, this Court noted the enactment of the Article was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97–2918 (La.10/20/98), and State v. Kennedy, 00–1554 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Jackson 265 So. 3d 928 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State of Louisiana v. Joseph Taylor 217 So. 3d 283 La. 2016
State v. Washburn 206 So. 3d 1143 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.
State of Louisiana v. Christopher Lance Washburn La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
In Williams, this Court noted the enactment of the Article was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), and State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01)
STATE of Louisiana v. Gary LAYTON; State of Louisiana v. Gary Layton 168 So. 3d 358 La. 2015
10/20/98), and State v. Kennedy, 2000–1554 (La.
State of Louisiana v. Nathaniel Wayne Carmouche La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
The Williams court found as follows: The transcript of the committee hearing reveals that Act 1130 was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), and State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Carmouche 145 So. 3d 1101 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
The Williams court found as follows: The transcript of the committee hearing reveals that Act 1130 was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Hollins 123 So. 3d 840 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
In Williams, this Court noted the enactment of the Article was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Napoleon 119 So. 3d 238 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), (citations omitted).
State v. Wright 79 So. 3d 309 La. 2011
In Williams , this Court 11snoted the enactment of the Article was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, 00-1554 (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Jacobs 67 So. 3d 535 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. McArthur, 97-2918, p. 2 *573 (La.10/20/98), (citations omitted).
State v. Fisher 40 So. 3d 1020 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
art. 404(B)(1) in State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.04/03/01), and State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and to allow admission of evidence of other similar cranes even for general intent crimes such as aggravated rape.
State v. Williams 28 So. 3d 357 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
art. 412.2 in response to State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), and Kennedy, supra.
State ex rel. D.G. 11 So. 3d 548 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
Miller, 718 So.2d at 960 ; State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), .
State Ex Rel. Dg 11 So. 3d 548 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
Miller, 718 So.2d at 960 ; State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), .
State v. Caston 996 So. 2d 480 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
art. 412.2 primarily in response to State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, supra .
State v. Cotton 980 So. 2d 34 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
10/20/98), (citation omitted).
State of Louisiana v. Robert S. Willis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
10/20/98), superceded by statute as stated in State v. Brown, 03-1747 (La.App.
State v. Willis 915 So. 2d 365 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , , writ denied, .
State v. Nguyen 888 So. 2d 900 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
"`Motive evidence reveals the state of mind or emotion that influenced the defendant to desire the result of the charged crime.'" State v. McArthur, 97-2918, p. 3 (La.10/20/98), [6] (quoting, D. Bryden and R. Park, "Other Crimes" Evidence in Sex Offense Cases, 1994 Minn. L.Rev.
State v. Merritt 877 So. 2d 1079 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
In State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), -1042 , the Louisiana Supreme Court explained when other crimes evidence is admissible to establish the "motive" of a defendant (citations omitted): "`Motive' evidence reveals the state of mind or emotion that influenced the defendant to desire the result of the charged crime."
State of Louisiana v. Charles Brown, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
The Williams court found as follows: The transcript of the committee hearing reveals that Act 1130 was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), and State v. Kennedy, 2000-1554 (La.4/3/01)
State v. Brown 874 So. 2d 318 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
The Williams court found as follows: The transcript of the committee hearing reveals that Act 1130 was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, XXXX-XXXX (La.4/3/01), .
State of Louisiana v. William Odell Cash La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
10/20/98), -40, (emphasis added): Finally, must be met.
State v. Cash 861 So. 2d 851 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
He cites State v. McArthur, 97-2918, pp. 1-2 (La.10/20/98), -40 , (emphasis added): Finally, (La.
State v. Olivieri 860 So. 2d 207 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
In State v. Williams, 02-1030 (La.10/15/02), -987 , the Louisiana Supreme Court reviewed the transcript of the committee hearing of Act 1130 that enacted Article 412.2 and explained the purpose of the article as follows: Act 1130 was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, XXXX-XXXX (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Small 850 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
2078 , 124 L.Ed.2d 182 (1993); State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), ; Rodriguez, supra .
State v. Williams 830 So. 2d 984 La. 2002
The transcript of the committee hearing reveals that Act 1130 was prompted primarily by two decisions of this Court, State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and State v. Kennedy, XXXX-XXXX (La.4/3/01), .
State v. Morgan 791 So. 2d 100 La. 2001
In State v. McArthur, 97-2918, pp. 3-4, (La.10/20/98), -42 , we reaffirmed the principles underlying Moore and held broadly that in adult sex crimes requiring proof only of general intent, evidence of unrelated sexual assaults against other adult victims is not admissible to negate a claim of consent or to prove "lustful disposition, motive, intent and plan."
State v. Kennedy 803 So. 2d 916 La. 2001
[5] As to the requisite burden of proof, we noted in State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , and more recently in State v. Cotton, 00-0850 (La.1/29/01), , that Article 1104 of the Louisiana Code of Evidence was added in 1994 to provide that "the burden of proof in a shall be identical to the burden of proof requ
State v. Clark 780 So. 2d 418 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
See State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98); ; State v. Miller, 98-301 (La.9/9/98); .
State v. Interest of WTB 771 So. 2d 807 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), .
State v. Schmidt 771 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
See also State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98); .
State v. Hills 761 So. 2d 516 La. 2000
While matters that are relevant should not be excluded merely because they show the accused has committed other offenses, because "evidence of other offenses is so strongly prejudicial, `the greatest care ought to be taken to reject such evidence, unless it is plainly necessary to prove something which is really in issue.'" State v. McArthur, 97-2918, p. 4 (La.1998), (citing Moore, 278 So.2d at 787-88).
State v. Pollard 760 So. 2d 362 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
The Supreme Court in State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , footnote 1 states: "This court has not yet addressed the extent to which Article 1104 and the burden of proof established in Huddleston, supra, has affected the burden of proof required for the admissibility of other crimes evidence."
Folse v. Folse 738 So. 2d 1040 La. 1999
Miller, 718 So.2d at 960 ; State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), .
State v. Hernandez 735 So. 2d 888 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , states in a footnote: Article 1104 of the Louisiana Code of Evidence was added in 1994 to provide that "[t]he burden of proof in a shall be identical to the burden of proof required by Federal Rules of Evidence Article IV, Rule 404."
State v. Hills 737 So. 2d 885 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
[5] Our Supreme Court was presented with an opportunity to decide the appropriate other crimes evidence burden of proof in State v. McArthur, 97-2918 (La.10/20/98), , 1039 n. 1, but it declined to do so.
State v. Jackson 734 So. 2d 658 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1999