Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite In re Wyly, 774 So. 2d 79.

16 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Raven Lamar Wiltz La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
State v. Johnson, 99-3462, pp. 2-3, -81.
State v. Coleman 259 So. 3d 1203 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
11/03/00), , which held that an exception to this general rule exists for cases in which the witness's prior inconsistent statement also constitutes a prior statement of identification for purposes of La.
State v. Miner 163 So. 3d 132 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Johnson, 99-3462, pp. 2-3, , 80-81.
State v. Robinson 150 So. 3d 900 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
1 State v. Johnson, 99-3462 (La.11/3/00), .
State v. Ross 144 So. 3d 1118 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
11/3/00), , 80 (citing United States v. Brink, 39 F.3d 419, 426 (3d Cir. 1994)).
State v. Joyner 107 So. 3d 675 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Stokes, 2001-2564, p. 1 (La.9/20/02), , citing State v. Johnson, 99-3462, pp. 2-3 (La.11/3/00), -81 .
State of Louisiana v. Terrance L. Sinegal La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Sinegal 97 So. 3d 649 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
| ijjOn appeal, Defendant stressed that Romero and Angelle’s identification of Defendant as a co-defendant is unreliable, citing State v. Johnson, 99-3462 (La.11/3/00), .
State v. Duncan 91 So. 3d 504 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Stokes, 2001-2564, p. 1 (La.9/20/02), , 1010, citing State v. Johnson, 99-3462, pp. 2-3 (La.11/3/00), -81 .
State Ex Rel. Dw 47 So. 3d 1048 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2010
State v. Johnson, 99-3462, p. 2 (La.11/3/00), .
State ex rel. D.W. 47 So. 3d 1048 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Johnson, 99-3462, p. 2 (La.11/3/00), .
State v. Richards 47 So. 3d 598 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Johnson, 99-3462, pp. 2-3, -81 .
State v. Jones 942 So. 2d 1215 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
In State v. Johnson, XXXX-XXXX (La.11/3/00), , the supreme court discussed attacking the credibility of a non-party witness through the use of prior inconsistent statements incriminating the accused.
State v. Tumblin 857 So. 2d 1045 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
State v. Johnson, 99-3462 (La.11/3/00), -81 .
State v. Stokes 829 So. 2d 1009 La. 2002
State v. Johnson, 99-3462, pp. 2-3, , 80-81.
State v. Collins 826 So. 2d 598 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
In State v. Johnson, 99-3462 (La.11/3/00), , the Supreme Court quotes the Brink case with approval, stating: "`If at trial the eyewitness fails to remember or denies that he made the identification, the previous statements of the eyewitness can be proved by testimony of a person to whom the statement was made, and the statement can be given substantive effect.