Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Landry, 524 So. 2d 1261.

19 citing documents.

State v. Callegari 773 So. 2d 806 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
State v. Jeanlouis 683 So. 2d 1355 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1996
State v. Campbell 673 So. 2d 1061 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
3 Cir.), writ denied, this court stated: (La.
State v. Young 663 So. 2d 301 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
Recently, this circuit discussed the jurisprudence: (La.
State v. Jordan 650 So. 2d 407 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1995
Recently, this circuit discussed the jurisprudence: (La.
State v. Robinson 634 So. 2d 1274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994
State v. DeRoche 629 So. 2d 1267 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1993
(3rd Cir.1988), reversed on other grounds
State v. Pipkins 628 So. 2d 1242 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
However, the trial court based its ruling under the thirteenth juror standard, saying, “I think what is key in making a decision is that there really is no conflict between the interest of discovery and the argument made by the prosecutor and the testimony of Mr. Byrne in this particular case.” This court recently stated: (La.App.
State v. Brown 627 So. 2d 192 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Lee 625 So. 2d 645 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Corley 617 So. 2d 1292 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Washington 614 So. 2d 242 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
The court, on motion of the defendant, shall grant a new trial whenever: (1) The verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence; (La.
State v. Washington 614 So. 2d 242 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
The court, on motion of the defendant, shall grant a new trial whenever: (1) The verdict is contrary to the law and the evidence; (La.
State v. Voorhies 590 So. 2d 776 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
State v. Long 590 So. 2d 694 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
State v. Savage 575 So. 2d 478 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
State v. Owens 567 So. 2d 806 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
State v. Bartley 564 So. 2d 1297 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
State v. Francis 554 So. 2d 257 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989