Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Guidry, 647 So. 2d 502.

25 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Anthony Scott Tubbs La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
App. 3 Cir. 12/7/94), and State v. Linkletter, 345 So.
State of Louisiana v. Joshua X. Griffin La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
App. 3 Cir. 12/7/94), (citing State v. Narcisse, 426 So.
State v. Griffin 217 So. 3d 484 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State of Louisiana v. Christopher K. Mayeux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
3 Cir. 12/7/94), State v. Stewart, 92-2536 (La.App.
State v. Mayeux 128 So. 3d 998 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
3 Cir. 12/7/94) , ; State v. Stewart, 92-2536 (La.
State of Louisiana v. Brandon Dale Allen La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
3 Cir. 12/7/94), this court held that “[t]he trial court‟s application of these precepts to newly discovered evidence is entitled to great weight, and its denial of a new trial will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear abuse of that discretion.” Defendant a
State v. Allen 79 So. 3d 1220 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
3 Cir. 12/7/94), , this court held that “[t]he trial court’s application of these precepts to newly discovered evidence is entitled to great weight, and its denial of a new trial will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear abuse of that discretion.” Defendant attached to the su
State of Louisiana v. Jonathan Edward Boyer La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
3 Cir. 12/7/94), and State v. Coutee, 07-568 (La.App.
State v. Boyer 56 So. 3d 1119 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
3 Cir. 12/7/94) , , and State v. Coutee, 07-568 (La.App.
Timothy J. Guidry v. J. Phil Haney La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
Guidry v. Haney 999 So. 2d 1167 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
State of Louisiana v. Wade Knott, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
State v. Knott 908 So. 2d 28 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
Mark Taylor v. State of La, Thru the Dotd La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
Taylor v. STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. 879 So. 2d 307 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2004
State v. George 855 So. 2d 861 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2003
State v. Taves 846 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
3 Cir. 12/7/94); , this court stated: "[t]he trial court's application of these precepts to newly discovered evidence is entitled to great weight, and its denial of a new trial will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear abuse of that discretion.
State v. Karam 834 So. 2d 1003 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
State v. Williams 804 So. 2d 932 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
State v. Toney 796 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
State v. Nogess 729 So. 2d 132 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
State v. Coleman 720 So. 2d 381 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1998
3 Cir. 12/7/94); -09 , this court articulated the standard for reviewing motions for new trial: LSA-C.Cr.P.
State v. Peterson 696 So. 2d 211 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1997
3 Cir. 12/7/94) ; in a situation similar to the present.
State v. Green 683 So. 2d 1292 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996
State v. Bolden 680 So. 2d 6 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1996