No. 2002-KK-0277
Precedential
Processed
State v. Fortino
State v. Fortino, 807 So. 2d 827 (La. 2002).
Cited by
Explained in 1
- Susan Arrington, Etc. v. Er Physicians Group, Apmc La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
- Arrington v. ER PHYSICIANS GROUP, APMC. 940 So. 2d 777 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
- Jordan v. Willis-Knighton Medical Center 911 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
- Hanks v. Seale 904 So. 2d 662 La. 2005
- Adam Ceasar Sr. v. Dr. Richard J. Barry La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
- Ceasar v. Barry 894 So. 2d 571 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
- Hall v. Brookshire Bros., Ltd. 848 So. 2d 559 La. 2003
- State v. Fortino 837 So. 2d 684 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2002
- Hall v. Brookshire Bros., Ltd. 831 So. 2d 1010 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
- Harrison v. Smith 832 So. 2d 1064 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
- Ceasar v. Barry 823 So. 2d 998 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2002
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- State v. Prieur 277 So. 2d 126
Opinion text
CALOGERO, Chief Justice, dissents from the writ denial. I would grant this writ. Apparently, from the application, the trial judge made a pretrial ruling without hearing testimony, medical evidence, or examining police reports. At the least, the trial judge should not let into evidence the eleven year old incident regarding defendant and a prior wife without some showing that it is relevant to demonstrate intent, knowledge, or system and otherwise complies with State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973).