Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Falkins, 146 So. 3d 838.

25 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Gary Allen La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), ).
State of Louisiana v. Gino McDowell La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), -48, this Court addressed the issue of whether a statement was testimonial: The defendant first argues that the 911 calls should have been suppressed because the substance of the calls was testimonial in nature, and therefore violated his rights under the Confro
State of Louisiana v. Corey Morgan La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), in support of its finding that the statements made on the 911 call do not fall under the excited utterance exception.
State of Louisiana v. Donald Franklin La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), -52 (internal citations omitted).
State of Louisiana v. Tremaine Williams La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2023
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), State v. White, []00-1740, p. 5 (La.
State of Louisiana Versus Ryk Frickey La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2023
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), State v. Richard, 05-1262 (La.
State of Louisiana v. Jimmy O'Neal Lewis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2022
4 Cir. 7/23/14), -48, the fourth circuit addressed the issue of whether a statement was testimonial: The defendant first argues that the 911 calls should have been suppressed because the substance of the calls was testimonial in nature, and therefore violated his rights under the Confrontation Clause of t
State of Louisiana in the Interest of J.H.. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), (citing State v. Marcantel, 00-1629, p. 8 (La.
State of Louisiana in the Interest of J.H.. La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2022
State v. Degregory 274 So. 3d 902 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), , 856-57.
State v. Daniels 262 So. 3d 356 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), , 851 (finding that testimony improperly introduced into evidence is harmless error if it did not contribute to the verdict).
State of Louisiana v. Troherro Keith Batiste La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), –48, the fourth circuit addressed the issue of whether a statement was testimonial: The defendant first argues that the 911 calls should have been suppressed because the substance of the calls was testimonial in nature, and therefore violated his rights under the Confrontation Clause of
State v. Batiste 246 So. 3d 52 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), , 847-48, the fourth circuit addressed the issue of whether a statement was testimonial: The defendant first argues that the 911 calls should have been suppressed because the substance of the calls was testimonial in nature, and therefore violated his rights under the Confrontation *64 Clause of the Sixth Amendment, w
State v. Obrien 242 So. 3d 1254 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
See State v. Falkins , , 849-51 (La.
State v. Luzzo 214 So. 3d 55 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
4 Cir. 7/23/14), -51 ; State v. Williams, 12-0252, p. 23 (La.App.
State v. Wells 191 So. 3d 1127 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
4 Cir. 7/23/14) , -51 (improperly admitted evidence will be harmless error if found to be cumulative and corroborative of other properly admitted evidence); State v. Hankton, 12-0466, p. 20 (La.App.
State v. Jackson 191 So. 3d 63 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
4 Cir. 7/23/14), ; State v. White, 2000-1740, p. 5 (La.App.
In re Interdiction of Benson 216 So. 3d 950 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Lambert 186 So. 3d 728 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
4 Cir. 7/23/14), , quoting State v. Colomb, 98-2813, pp. 3-4 (La.10/1/99), -76 .
State v. King 186 So. 3d 264 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Pollard 165 So. 3d 289 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 7/23/14), (citing State v. Marcantel, 00-1629, p. 8 (La.4/3/02), ).
State v. Hartford 162 So. 3d 1202 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Simonson 163 So. 3d 37 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 7/23/14), (citing State v. Marcantel, 00-1629, p. 8 (La.4/3/02), ).
State v. Rapp 161 So. 3d 103 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 7/23/14), , quoting State v. Colomb, 98-2813, pp. 3-4 (La.10/1/99), -76 (emphasis added.).
State v. Ramirez 154 So. 3d 636 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
App. 4 Cir. 7/23/14), ( State v. Brown, 2008-1434, p. 8 (La.App.