Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Rodosta, 138 So. 124.

17 citing documents.

State v. McAllister 366 So. 2d 1340 La. 1978
As a result of the Court's declaring Article 238 , 138 So.
State v. Skinner 204 So. 2d 370 La. 1967
State v. Hills 129 So. 2d 12 La. 1961
State v. Butler 89 So. 2d 294 La. 1956
His entire argument is founded upon a belief that Act No. 161 of 1948 is a procedural act which amends the substantive law and that such legislation is unconstitutional; , 138 So.
State v. Simpson 43 So. 2d 585 La. 1949
His entire argument is founded upon a belief that Act No. 161 of 1948 is a procedural act which amends the substantive law and that such legislation is unconstitutional; , 138 So.
State v. Brown 36 So. 2d 624 La. 1948
State v. Ambrose 34 So. 2d 261 La. 1948
State v. Moore 199 So. 661 La. 1940
623, ; 14 American Jurisprudence 764, § 14; 12 Corpus Juris 195, § 25; 22 Corpus Juris Secundum, Criminal Law, § 21, p. 69; Marr’s Criminal Jurisprudence of Louisiana, 2d Ed., 35, Section 11; 5 R.C.L.
State v. Clement 193 So. 685 La. 1940
But to have this effect a prima facie case of conspiracy must have been established.” , 138 So.
State v. Whitlock 192 So. 697 La. 1939
In a similar situation, , 138 So.
State v. Dallao 175 So. 4 La. 1937
State v. Elmore 155 So. 896 La. 1934
It is conceded that, if that article of the Code, which has reference only to the number of peremptory challenges allowed each side in criminal prosecutions, is procedural law, the article is constitutionaL But it is argued that the article is “substantive” and not “procedural” law, , 138 So.
State v. Florane 154 So. 417 La. 1934
State v. Capaci 154 So. 419 La. 1934
276, 282 , it is said: “ , 138 So.
State v. Bussa 145 So. 276 La. 1932
Before the adoption of the Code of Criminal Procedure the required allegation was that the offense charged was not known to a public officer having the power to direct a public prosecution, and since its adoption the necessary allegation is that the offense charged was not known “to the judge, district attorney of Grand Jury having jurisdiction.” , 138 So.
State v. Terrell 144 So. 488 La. 1932
State v. Campbell 138 So. 853 La. 1931
The settled jurisprudence of the state prior to the adoption of the Criminal Code, , recently decided by this court, was that an accessory before the fact could not be convicted on an indictment charging him as a principal.