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. Santos, 770 So. 2d 319.

43 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana v. Desmond Deondre Scarborough La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2025
    9/15/00), –22 (seventh alteration added), the supreme court found the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s right to self-representation: Affirming relator’s conviction and sentence for possession of heroin in violation of La.R.S.
  • State Of Louisiana v. Andrew David Wetzel La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
    9/ 15/ 00), ( per curiam), the Louisiana Supreme Court held that a trial court confronted with an accused' s unequivocal request to represent himself need only determine whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and is " voluntarily exercising his informed free will."
  • State Of Louisiana v. Donovan Darville La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2024
    9/ 15/ 00), ( per curiam) ( quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835, 95 S. Ct. at 2541).
  • State of Louisiana v. Marcel N. Dugar La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
    In State v. Santos, this Court held that where a trial judge is confronted with an accused’s unequivocal request to represent himself, the judge need determine only whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and is “voluntarily exercising his informed free will.” State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), (quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835, 95 S.Ct.
  • Rev. Errol Victor, Sr. Versus State of Louisiana La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2022
  • State Of Louisiana v. Fredrick A. Murray La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2020
    9/ 15/ 00), ( per curiam) ( oting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835, 95 S. Ct. at 2541).
  • State of Louisiana v. Douglas Scott Holley La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2020
    Faretta v. California, supra, 422 U.S. at 835, 95 S. Ct. at 2541; State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00)
  • State v. Barnett 267 So. 3d 209 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
    9/15/00), , 321 (quoting Faretta , 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Speaks 204 So. 3d 1167 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2016
  • State of Louisiana v. Robert Leroy McCoy 218 So. 3d 535 La. 2016
  • State v. Ferguson 181 So. 3d 120 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    Once the defendant has made an unequivocal request to represent himself, the trial court must determine whether the' defendant is competent to waive counsel and is “voluntarily exercising his informed free will.” State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), (per curiam) (citing Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Victor 167 So. 3d 118 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2014
    Once the defendant has made an unequivocal request to represent himself, the trial court must determine whether the defendant is competent to waive counsel and is “voluntarily exercising informed free will.” State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00); .
  • State of Louisiana v. Gerald Brent Debarge La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
  • State v. Elzy 109 So. 3d 57 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    Once the defendant has made an unequivocal request to represent himself, the trial court must determine whether the defendant is competent to waive counsel and is “voluntarily exercising informed free will.” State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), .
  • State v. Hayes 107 So. 3d 668 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    In State v. Santos, our Supreme Court held that, when a defendant makes an unequivocal request to represent himself, the judge need determine only whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and “voluntarily exercising his informed free will.” State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), (quoting Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Mathieu 68 So. 3d 1015 La. 2011
    his technical legal knowledge, as such, was not relevant to an assessment of his knowing exercise of the right to defend himself.”); State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), (“In this context, ‘the competence that is required of a defendant seeking to waive his right to counsel is the competence to waive the right, not the competence to represent himself.’”)(quoting Godinez v. Moran, 509 U.S. 389, 399 , 113 S.Ct.
  • State v. Kimble 62 So. 3d 782 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    A trial judge confronted with ah |fiaccused’s unequivocal request to represent himself need determine only if the accused is competent to waive counsel and is “voluntarily exercising his informed free will.” State v. Santos, 99-1897, pp. 2-3 (La.9/15/00), (per curiam) (quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Robinson 42 So. 3d 435 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
    In State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), (per curiam), the supreme court held that where a trial judge is confronted with an accused’s unequivocal request to represent himself, the judge need determine only whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and is voluntarily exercising his informed free will.
  • State v. Crosby 6 So. 3d 1281 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
    See State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.09/15/00), .
  • State v. Campbell 983 So. 2d 810 La. 2008
    State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), (quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Lewis 982 So. 2d 866 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
    State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), , quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Lewis 982 So. 2d 870 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
    State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), , quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. LaGarde 970 So. 2d 1111 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
    State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), .
  • State v. Brown 966 So. 2d 1138 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    In support of his position, Hypolite cites State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), , in which the supreme court explained: A trial judge confronted with an accused's unequivocal request to represent himself need determine only whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and is "voluntarily exercising his informed free will."
  • State of Louisiana v. Robert Wayne Brown La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    In support of his position, Hypolite cites State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), in which the supreme court explained: 23 A trial judge confronted with an accused’s unequivocal request to represent himself need determine only whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and is “voluntarily exercising his info
  • State v. Palmer 963 So. 2d 466 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
    Likewise, as the Louisiana Supreme Court noted in State v. Santos, 99-1897, pp. 203 (La.9/15/00), , 321 8 (emphasis added): Nevertheless, despite the potential impact an accused’s waiver of counsel may have on the fairness of the proceedings, Faretta made clear that the accused’s “technical legal knowledge, as such, [is] not relevant to an assessment of his knowing exercise of the right to defend himself.” Faretta
  • State v. Mathieu 960 So. 2d 296 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
    State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), .
  • State v. Moore 958 So. 2d 36 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
    State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), , quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Brandenburg 949 So. 2d 625 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), (quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State of Louisiana v. Willard Brandenburg La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
    In State v. Santos, this Court held that where a trial judge is confronted with an accused’s unequivocal request to represent himself, the judge need determine only whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and is “voluntarily exercising his informed free will.” State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), (quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835, 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Gauthier 941 So. 2d 642 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
    *649 In State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court made it clear that when a defendant has made an unequivocal request to represent himself, the trial court judge is only required to determine whether the defendant is competent to waive his right to counsel and is doing so by exercising his informed free will.
  • Distinguished State of Louisiana v. Nicholas Demond Pitree La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    9/15/00), is controlling, that case is easily distinguishable.
  • Distinguished State v. Pitree 930 So. 2d 265 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
    Although the defendant argues that this Court's decision in State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), , is controlling, that case is easily distinguishable.
  • State v. Bonit 928 So. 2d 633 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), (quoting Faretta, 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Mendez 923 So. 2d 189 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    [18] State v. Bruce, 864 So.2d at 857 (citing State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), , quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Brown 907 So. 2d 1 La. 2005
    State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), (quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State of Louisiana v. Tyrone Hypolite La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    9/15/00), in which the supreme court explained: A trial judge confronted with an accused's unequivocal request to represent himself need determine only whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and is “voluntarily exercising his informed free will.” Faretta [v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95
  • State v. Hypolite 903 So. 2d 1275 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    In support of his position, Hypolite cites State v. Santos, 99-1897, p. 3 (La.9/15/00), , in which the supreme court explained: A trial judge confronted with an accused's unequivocal request to represent himself need determine only whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and is "voluntarily exercising his informed free will."
  • State v. Bruce 864 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
    State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), , quoting Faretta, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Douglas 862 So. 2d 390 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
    See State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.09/15/00), .
  • State v. Granier 857 So. 2d 1176 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2003
  • State v. Batchelor 823 So. 2d 367 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
    As the Louisiana Supreme Court has noted, "A trial judge confronted with an accused's unequivocal request to represent himself need determine only whether the accused is competent to waive counsel and is `voluntarily exercising his informed free will.'" State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), , quoting Faretta, supra .
  • Distinguished State v. Bridgewater 823 So. 2d 877 La. 2002
    Although the defendant argues that this Court's decision in State v. Santos, 99-1897 (La.9/15/00), , is controlling, that case is easily distinguishable.