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. Guzman, 769 So. 2d 1158.

575 citing documents.

  • State v. Campbell 799 So. 2d 1136 La. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528, p. 6 (La.5/16/00), (discouraging the practice in "recently encountered cases in which an intermediate court reversed a conviction, arising from a plea bargain, based on an error that the defendant deliberately chose not to raise because *1137 the defendant was satisfied with the plea bargain.").
  • State v. Esteves 800 So. 2d 1040 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Elledge 797 So. 2d 170 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    he State appeals, assigning the following as error: The trial court erred by granting the defendant’s Motion to Quash in the instant prosecution, thereby precluding the State from using a plea to a prior driving while intoxicated charge to enhance the penalties imposed on a subsequent offense in contradiction to the decision of the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Guzman, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00); .
  • State v. Powell 796 So. 2d 91 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Johnson 796 So. 2d 201 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    at 604 605, citing State v. Guzman, 99-1528, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Hill 796 So. 2d 127 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528 & 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Wood 793 So. 2d 441 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Richardson 790 So. 2d 717 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    [8] State v. Brown, 94-1290 (La.1/17/95), ; State v. Guzman, 99-1528 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. George 785 So. 2d 975 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Haywood 783 So. 2d 568 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Crane 783 So. 2d 448 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Lewis 782 So. 2d 662 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528 and 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Williams 781 So. 2d 673 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528, 99-1753 (La.5/16/2000), .
  • State v. Williams 781 So. 2d 682 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    State v. Guzman, 99-1528, 99-1753 (La.5/16/2000), .
  • State v. Jones 778 So. 2d 1131 La. 2001
    In State v. Guzman, 99-1528, p. 6 (La.5/16/00), , and made clear that a guilty plea colloquy is not part of the record for purposes of error patent review.
  • State v. Bryant 775 So. 2d 596 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    State v. Guzman, 99-1753 (La.05/16/00), .
  • State v. Johnson 780 So. 2d 403 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
    In State v. Guzman, 99-1528 (La.5/16/00); , the Supreme Court adopted the harmless error test for violations of LSA-C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Feaster 779 So. 2d 761 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    We note the supreme court's holding in State v. Stiles, 99-1753, 99-1528 (La.5/16/00), , that deficiencies in the plea colloquy required by La.C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Davenport 771 So. 2d 837 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    State v. Guzman, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Burnett 768 So. 2d 783 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    More recently, in State v. Guzman, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), , the court considered violations of La.C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Echols 774 So. 2d 993 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
    In the recent case of State v. Guzman, 99-1753, 99-1528, p. 4 (La.5/16/00), , our Supreme Court rejected a defendant's argument that a trial court's failure to comply with La.C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Richard 769 So. 2d 1177 La. 2000
    In State v. Guzman, 99-1528, p. 6 (La.5/16/00), , *1178 1162, and thereby made clear that a guilty plea colloquy is not part of the record for purposes of error patent review.
  • State v. Kennon 769 So. 2d 159 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
    See State v. Guzman, 99-1528, 99-1753 (La.5/16/00), (holding that violations of La.C.Cr.P.
  • State v. Frickey 769 So. 2d 791 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2000
    State v. Guzman, 99-1753, p. 5 (La.5/16/00), .
  • State v. Gross 768 So. 2d 592 La. 2000
    14:30.1A(2)(a), cannot “ ‘reasonably be viewed as having a material factor affecting the [defendant’s] decision to plead guilty.” ’ State v. Guzman, 99-1528, p. 11 (La.5/16/00), (quoting United States v. Johnson, 1 F.3d 296, 301-02 (5th Cir.1993)).