No. 2003-KK-1944 Precedential Processed

State v. Guidry

Louisiana Supreme Court · Filed November 21, 2003 · 862 So. 2d 965

Cited by

State of Louisiana v. David Ray Newsom La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
State v. Newsom 250 So. 3d 894 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State v. Julien 229 So. 3d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State v. Young 140 So. 3d 136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Guidry 866 So. 2d 944 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004

Authorities cited

Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.

State v. Matthieu 506 So. 2d 1209
State v. Bienvenu 260 La. 1023

Opinion text

PER CURIAM. Granted. This case is remanded to the court of appeal for reconsideration and written treatment in light of United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 , 104 S.Ct. 3405 , 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984). See United States v. Richardson, 943 F.2d 547, 550 (5th Cir.1991); United States v. Turner, 926 F.2d 883, 886 (9th Cir.1991); United States v. Rome, 809 F.2d 665, 669-70 (10th Cir.1987). See also State v. Matthieu, 506 So.2d 1209, 1212 (La.1987) (“‘La.C.Cr.P. Art. 703 permits suppression only of evi *966 dence obtained “by an unconstitutional search or seizure.” It was not intended to permit suppression of evidence seized by a warrant ‘illegal’ merely because technically contrary to law, unless the seizure is viola-tive of fundamental due process concepts.’ ’’(quoting State v. Bienvenu, 260 La. 1023, n. 1 , 258 So.2d 72, 74 (1972)).