Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Steward, 681 So. 2d 1007.

16 citing documents.

State v. Davis 273 So. 3d 670 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2019
State v. Law 189 So. 3d 1164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Staden 154 So. 3d 579 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. ZANTIZ 24 So. 3d 1034 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
App. 1st Cir. 9/27/96), .
State v. Fedele 973 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State v. Taves 846 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
App. 1 Cir. 9/27/96); , the court explained: The provisions of this statute apply when any one occurrence mentioned in Subsection (B) combines with any one occurrence enumerated in Subsection (A).
State v. Williams 842 So. 2d 1143 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
1 Cir. 9/27/96), , 1014 and stated: We find no ambiguity in the second degree kidnapping statute.
State v. Booker 839 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
State v. Marcotte 817 So. 2d 1245 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
1 Cir. 9/27/96) ; ; (La.App.
Criticized State v. Deal 802 So. 2d 1254 La. 2001
See Pugh, Handbook on Louisiana Evidence Law, 1998, art. 704, p. 442 (-1012 (La.App.
State v. Reese 774 So. 2d 1164 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
App.1st Cir. 9/27/95), (second-degree kidnapping statute does not require that distance traveled during forcible seizure be any particular distance); (La.
State v. Schmidt 771 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2000
1 Cir. 9/27/96) ; ; (La.App.
State v. Robinson 754 So. 2d 311 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2000
State v. Jefferson 735 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
1 Cir. 9/27/96) , ; (La.App.
State v. Jones 720 So. 2d 52 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
State v. Hebert 697 So. 2d 1040 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997