Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State ex rel. S.L., 94 So. 3d 822.

26 citing documents.

State of Louisiana Versus Michael Wallace La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2025
App. 5 Cir. 4/24/12), (citing State v. Ross, 95-1798 (La.
State of Louisiana Versus Eddie J Richards La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2024
State of Louisiana in the Interest of J.F. La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2024
State of Louisiana v. Reginald K. Jackson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
State of Louisiana in the Interest of S.C.. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2021
App. 5 Cir. 4/24/12), ), this Court summarized the law as it applies to the burden of proving identification as follows: In addition to proving the statutory elements of the charged offense, the State is required to prove the identity of the perpetrator.
Vs. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2021
Vs. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2021
State v. Brazell 245 So. 3d 15 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 5 Cir. 4/24/12), , 836.
State v. Harris 230 So. 3d 285 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
App. 5 Cir. 4/24/12), , 827 n. 2.
State ex rel. W.B. 206 So. 3d 974 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
5 Cir. 4/24/12) , (holding *981 that Miranda, supra, held that the prosecution may not use a statement, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of a defendant unless the prosecution demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination.).
State ex rel. P.M. 186 So. 3d 693 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
5 Cir. 4/24/12), , citing La.
State ex rel. C.L. 180 So. 3d 604 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
5 Cir. 4/24/12) ; n. 1 .
State ex rel. T.W. 175 So. 3d 504 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Fairman 173 So. 3d 1278 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Baham 169 So. 3d 558 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
5 Cir. 4/24/12) , , 827 n. 2; La.
State ex rel. K.D. 140 So. 3d 182 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
5 Cir. 4/24/12) , , the applicable law regarding the burden of proving identification was summarized as follows: In addition to proving the statutory elements of the charged offense, the State is required to prove the identity of the perpetrator.
State v. Rosales 132 So. 3d 1285 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2014
5 Cir. 4/24/12), , 827 n. 2; La.
State in the Interest of N. F. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
5 Cir. 4/24/12), : [I]f the entirety of the evidence, both admissible and inadmissible, was insufficient to support the conviction, the defendant is entitled to an acquittal and no further inquiry as to trial errors is necessary.
State ex rel. N.F. 124 So. 3d 1262 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
5 Cir. 4/24/12), , 830: [I]f the entirety of the evidence, both admissible and inadmissible, was insufficient to support the conviction, the defendant is entitled to an acquittal and no further inquiry as to trial errors is necessary.
State v. Jones 128 So. 3d 436 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
5 Cir. 4/24/12), , 827 n. 2.
State ex rel. J.A.J. 128 So. 3d 449 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Lang 128 So. 3d 330 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
5 Cir. 4/24/12), , 827 n. 2; See also La.
State v. Lewis 121 So. 3d 128 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
5 Cir. 4/24/12), , 827 n. 2; LSA-C.C.P.
State v. Cooks 108 So. 3d 1257 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Drewery 108 So. 3d 1246 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Fisher 105 So. 3d 964 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
5 Cir. 4/24/12) , , the juvenile was adjudicated delinquent for illegal possession of a handgun by a juvenile, LSA-R.S.