Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Aocardo, 56 So. 631.

19 citing documents.

State v. Smith 554 So. 2d 676 La. 1989
State v. McAllister 366 So. 2d 1340 La. 1978
State v. Hamilton 356 So. 2d 1360 La. 1978
State v. Lepkowski 316 So. 2d 727 La. 1975
Less than a year ago, noted that the type of argument used in this case, "* * * , 56 So.
State v. Kaufman 304 So. 2d 300 La. 1974
State v. Matassa 62 So. 2d 609 La. 1952
State v. Cascio 54 So. 2d 95 La. 1951
State v. Hoover 54 So. 2d 130 La. 1951
State v. Tullos 182 So. 321 La. 1938
611 ), but “remarks made by him argumentatively furnish no ground for setting aside the verdict ( , 56 So.
State v. Rodosta 138 So. 124 La. 1931
State v. Prudhomme 129 So. 736 La. 1930
State v. Dundas 121 So. 586 La. 1929
State v. Cole 109 So. 505 La. 1926
671 , ; State v. Romero, 117 La.
State v. Green 106 So. 701 La. 1925
671 , ; State v. Romero, 117 La.
State v. Foster 95 So. 536 La. 1923
State v. Johnson 75 So. 678 La. 1917
State v. James 65 So. 548 La. 1914
ar, the property of the Louisiana Railway & Navigation Company, a corporation, with felonious intent to steal the goods in said car, has appealed, and relies for reversal upon the refusal of the trial judge to give the following special charge: “Before you can find the accused guilty as charged in this indictment, the state must prove the existence of such a corporation.” , 56 South.
State v. Robertson 63 So. 363 La. 1913
State v. Manuel 63 So. 174 La. 1913