Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Norah, 131 So. 3d 172.

16 citing documents.

  • State of Louisiana Versus Kevin Jenkins La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
    App. 4 Cir. 12/11/13), writs denied, 14-84 (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Sharrieff M. Kent La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
  • State of Louisiana in the Interest of S.C.. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2021
  • State of Louisiana v. Roland Butler La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
    App. 4 Cir. 12/11/13), (“We review a trial court’s determination on the admissibility of an out-of-court identification and its subsequent denial of a motion to suppress for abuse-of-discretion.”).
  • State of Louisiana v. Brandon R. Laurant La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
    App. 4 Cir. 12/11/13), -96, this Court set out the standard of review for an excessive sentence: Article I, Section 20 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974 prohibits any law from subjecting a person to excessive punishment.
  • State v. Payne 258 So. 3d 1015 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2018
    App. 4 Cir. 12/11/13), , writs denied , 14-0084 (La.
  • State v. Chambers 212 So. 3d 643 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    4 Cir. 12/11/13), (citation omitted).
  • State v. Halley 212 So. 3d 596 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
    4 Cir. 12/11/13) , , writ denied, 2014-0084 (La.
  • State v. Dove 194 So. 3d 92 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    4 Cir. 12/11/13), , this court set out the standard of review for an excessive sentence: Article I, Section 20 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1974 prohibits any law from subjecting a person to excessive punishment.
  • State v. Wells 191 So. 3d 1127 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    See State v. Norah, 12-1194, p. 31 (La.App/4 Cir. 12/11/13), (citing State v. Magee, 11-0574, pp. 41-42 (La.9/28/12), -16 ).
  • State v. Williams 186 So. 3d 242 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
    4 Cir. 12/11/13), , units denied, 2014-0084 (La.6/13/14), and 2014-0082 (La.6/20/14), , this Court discussed the nature of inmate calls as follows: Phone calls from an inmate to another private citizen are generally ‘non-testimonial.’ These conversations are simply too attenuated • in kind - from a pol
  • State v. Rapp 161 So. 3d 103 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
    4 Cir. 12/11/13), , writ denied, 14-0084 (La.6/13/14), , writ denied, 14-0082 (La.6/20/14), , citing La.
  • State v. Briley 151 So. 3d 633 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    4 Cir. 12/11/13), , this Court recognized that a trial court’s ruling with regard to a motion to suppress identification will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion: We review a trial court’s determination on the admissibility of an out-of-court identification and its subsequent denial of a motion to suppress for abuse-of-
  • State v. Owens 151 So. 3d 86 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    4 Cir. 12/11/13) , , writs denied, 14-0084 (La.6/13/14), and 14-0082 (La.6/20/14), , the appellate court discussed the nature of inmate calls as follows: Phone calls from an inmate to another private citizen are generally ‘non-testimonial.’ These conversations are simply too attenuated in kind from a po
  • State v. Small 147 So. 3d 1274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    4 Cir. 12/11/13), , writ denied, 14-008419 (La.6/13/14), , quoting Boatner , 03-0485, p. 6, 861 So.2d at 153 .
  • State v. Hampton 136 So. 3d 240 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014