Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Landry, 729 So. 2d 1019.

29 citing documents.

State v. McMasters 251 So. 3d 1139 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Freeman 194 So. 3d 1 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2016
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), ; State v. Sinclair, supra.
State v. Fields 151 So. 3d 756 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
See State v. Weber, 13-1851, p. 2 (La.5/30/14), , citing and quoting United States v. Nafzger, 974 F.2d 906, 911 (7th Cir.1992); see also State v. Landry, 98-0188, p. 5 (La.1/20/00), .
State v. Weber 139 So. 3d 519 La. 2014
The determination of whether the blood draw was justified under the circumstances entails a purely objective inquiry considering “all of the information known collectively to the law enforcement personnel involved in the investigation.” State v. Landry, 98-0188, p. 5 (La.1/20/00), (citing and quoting United States.
State v. Harris 140 So. 3d 1226 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
State v. Landry, 1998-0188 (La.01/20/99), ; Sinclair, supra.
State v. Gates 145 So. 3d 288 La. 2014
1769, 1772, 1774 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996); State v. Waters, 00-0356, p. 4 (La.3/12/01), ; State v. Landry, 98-0188, p. 2 (La.01/20/99), .
State v. Candebat 133 So. 3d 304 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
1769, 1772, 1774 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996); State v. Waters, 00-0356, p. 4 (La.3/12/01), ; State v. Landry, 98-0188, p. 2 (La.01/20/99), ....
State v. Burney 92 So. 3d 1184 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), ; State v. Pena, supra; State v. Arnold, 34,194 (La.App.2d Cir.12/6/00), .
State v. Cortez 98 So. 3d 382 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
2 Cir. 12/14/11), -20 (citing State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), (per curiam)).
State v. Lee 79 So. 3d 1278 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), ; State v. Stowe, 44,815 (La.App.2d Cir.10/28/09), .
State v. Roberson 81 So. 3d 911 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), .
State of Louisiana v. Brandon Dale Allen La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
1/8/99), (citing United States v. Klein, 93 F.3d 698, 701 (10th Cir. 1996) (“Probable cause can rest upon the collective knowledge of the police, rather than solely on that of the officer who actually makes the arrest.”)); United States v. Butler, 74 F.3d 9
State v. Allen 79 So. 3d 1220 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
Elliott explained that: The determination of whether probable cause exists for an arrest or reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop is a purely objective inquiry that takes into account “all of the information known collectively to the law enforcement personnel involved in the investigation.” State v. Landry, 98-3008 [98-0188], p. 5 (La.1/8[20]/99), (citing United States v. Klein, 93 F.3d 698, 701 (10th Cir.1996) (“Probable cause can rest upon the collective knowledge of the police, rathe
State v. Harris 79 So. 3d 1037 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), (per curiam).
State v. Sinclair 72 So. 3d 448 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.01/20/99), ; State v. Arnold, 34,194 (La.App.2d Cir.12/06/00), .
State v. Malone 56 So. 3d 336 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), ; State v. Pena, supra; State v. Arnold, 34,194 (La.App.2d Cir.12/6/00), .
State v. Norals 44 So. 3d 907 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
1769, 1772, 1774 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996); State v. Waters, 00-0356, p. 4 (La.3/12/01), ; State v. Landry, 98-0188, p. 2 (La.01/20/99), .
State v. Elliott 35 So. 3d 247 La. 2010
LAW The determination of whether probable cause exists for an arrest or reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop is a purely objective inquiry that takes into account “all of the information known collectively to the law enforcement personnel involved in the investigation.” State v. Landry, 98-3008, p. 5 (La.1/8/99), (citing United States v. Klein, 93 F.3d 698, 701 (10th Cir.1996) (“Probable cause can rest upon the collective knowledge of the police, rather than solely on that of the offic
State v. Lawrence 32 So. 3d 329 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), ; State v. Pena supra; State v. Arnold, 34,194 (La.App.2d Cir.12/6/00), .
State v. Hunt 25 So. 3d 746 La. 2009
1769, 1772, 1774 , 135 L.Ed.2d 89 (1996); State v. Waters, 00-0356, p. 4 (La.3/12/01), ; State v. Landry, 98-0188, p. 2 (La.01/20/99), .
State v. Pratt 16 So. 3d 1163 La. 2009
State v. Landry, 98- *1165 0188, p. 5 (La.1/20/99), (citations omitted).
State v. KHALFANI 998 So. 2d 756 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
1/20/99), ; State v. Arnold, 34,194 (La.App.2d Cir. 12/6/00), .
State v. Collins 998 So. 2d 765 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
1/20/99), ; State v. Arnold, 34,194 (La.App.
State v. Chambers 993 So. 2d 215 La. 2008
See State v. Landry, 98-3008, pp. 4-5 (La.1/8/99), -22 (appellate court may remand for retrial of a motion to suppress to correct errors made at original hearing)(collecting cases).
State v. Pena 988 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), ; State v. Arnold, 34,194 (La.App.
State v. Gomez 802 So. 2d 914 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
See State v. Landry, 98-188 (La.1/20/99), , and the cases cited therein.
State v. Diaz 800 So. 2d 1090 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
In State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), , the lead detective testified at the motion to suppress the defendants’ statements that at the time he went to the defendants’ residence he did not have probable cause to arrest them because he did not have everything that he wanted.
State v. Arnold 779 So. 2d 840 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.01/20/99), ; State v. Kalie, 96-2650 (La.09/19/97), .
State v. Young 751 So. 2d 364 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
See, State v. Landry, 98-0188 (La.1/20/99), .