Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Cyrus, 97 So. 3d 554.

21 citing documents.

State of Louisiana in the Interest of K.M. . La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
State of Louisiana v. Derrick Cardet Withers La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2023
4 Cir. 7/5/12), citing State v. Richardson, 97-1995, p. 14 (La.App.
State v. Williams 265 So. 3d 902 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
App. 4 Cir. 7/5/12), , 565 ).
State v. Daniels 262 So. 3d 356 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 7/5/12), , 565.
State v. Hunter 252 So. 3d 1053 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 7/5/12), , 565.
State v. Jackson 191 So. 3d 63 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Lambert 191 So. 3d 630 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
4 Cir. 7/5/12), , citing State v. Richardson, 97-1995, p. 14 (La.App.
State v. Griffin 176 So. 3d 561 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 7/5/12), (citing State v. Richardson, 97-1995, p. 14 (La.App.
State v. Taylor 165 So. 3d 1115 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 7/5/12), , citing State v. Richardson, 97-1995, p. 14 (La.App.
State v. Pollard 165 So. 3d 289 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 7/5/12), ); State v. White, 09-0025, p. 9 *303 (La.App.
State v. Rouser 158 So. 3d 860 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Greenberry 154 So. 3d 700 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Hatfield 155 So. 3d 572 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 7/5/12), (citing State v. Richardson, 97-1995, p. 14 (La.App.
State v. Ross 137 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 7/5/12), (citing State v. Richardson, 97-1995, p. 14 (La.App.
State v. Augustine 133 So. 3d 148 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Allen 129 So. 3d 724 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Keys 125 So. 3d 19 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 7/5/12) , -66 , ( ).
State v. Jackson 115 So. 3d 1155 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 7/5/12), , citing State v. Richardson, 97-1995, p. 14 (La.App.
State v. Williams 115 So. 3d 600 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 7/5/12), , citing State v. Richardson, 97-1995, p. 14 (La.App.
State v. Buhcannon 112 So. 3d 312 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 7/5/12), , this Court acknowledged the well-settled standard of review of a trial court’s ruling with respect to a motion to suppress identification, as well as the defendant’s burden: A trial court’s determination of the admissibility of identification evidence is entitled to great weight and will not be disturbed in the
State v. Skipper 101 So. 3d 537 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 7/5/12), -66 , ( ).