Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Bischoff, 84 So. 41.

18 citing documents.

Wiley v. Wiley 387 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1980
State v. Durr 343 So. 2d 1004 La. 1977
169 (1937) (on motion to quash, the testimony of grand jurors that the district attorney and his assistant were present in the grand jury room during deliberations and the voting on the indictment was held admissible); , 84 So.
State v. Pellerin 286 So. 2d 639 La. 1973
State v. Mims 267 So. 2d 570 La. 1972
State v. Jackson 202 So. 2d 264 La. 1967
State v. Dooley 67 So. 2d 558 La. 1953
State v. Ambrose 34 So. 2d 261 La. 1948
In Re Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. 23 So. 2d 63 La. 1945
State v. Kavanaugh 13 So. 2d 366 La. 1943
State v. Dallao 175 So. 4 La. 1937
Shipp v. Shipp 165 So. 189 La. 1935
State v. Block 154 So. 46 La. 1934
631, 632 , this court, in construing a similar statute, namely Act No. 73 of 1898, said: “The statute not only protects the accused against conviction for any such offense (meaning one prescribed), but relieves him even of being tried therefor.” , 84 So.
Spyker v. International Paper Co. 138 So. 109 La. 1931
State v. Hayes 111 So. 327 La. 1927
State v. Sullivan 105 So. 631 La. 1925
State v. McNeal 105 So. 381 La. 1925
id: “When, therefore, the state undertakes to prosecute under an indictment which charges an offense committed more than a year prior to its finding, it proceeds in violation of a prohibitory law, unless it makes allegation that the offense was not made known, within the year, to any public officer having the power to direct the investigation or prosecution.” , 84 So.
State v. Posey 101 So. 869 La. 1924
State v. Richard 89 So. 697 La. 1921