Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Silsby, 146 So. 684.

25 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Robyn B. Little Davis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
727, (1933), the defendant‟s confession was admitted into evidence despite the fact that the state failed to mention the confession in its opening statement.
State of Louisiana v. Carol Noland Saltzman La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
727, (1933), the defendant‟s confession was admitted into evidence despite the fact that the state failed to mention the confession in its opening statement.
State v. Davis 129 So. 3d 554 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Saltzman 128 So. 3d 1060 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Stevenson 390 So. 2d 1292 La. 1980
State v. Sneed 316 So. 2d 372 La. 1975
State v. Himel 257 So. 2d 670 La. 1972
4 (to make the district attorney show his hand, enabling the accused to better meet the issue and make his defense); , 146 So.
State v. Augustine 131 So. 2d 56 La. 1961
State v. Jones 98 So. 2d 185 La. 1957
State v. Clark 93 So. 2d 13 La. 1957
State v. Jones 88 So. 2d 655 La. 1956
State v. Rocco 62 So. 2d 265 La. 1952
Overruled State v. Winey 44 So. 2d 115 La. 1950
In support of this objection, which was overruled by the judge, counsel relies upon Article 333 , 146 So.
State v. Barton 22 So. 2d 183 La. 1945
State v. Hutton 3 So. 2d 549 La. 1941
State v. Sharbino 194 So. 756 La. 1940
State v. Ward 175 So. 69 La. 1937
“To affirm the verdict in this case, in which no opening, statement at all has been made by the district attorney, would be for this court to read out of the Code of Criminal Procedure article 333, prescribing the order of procedure in the trial of .criminal cases in this state, and to substitute its own views on the subject.” , 146 So.
State v. Cannon 166 So. 485 La. 1936
The judge’s per curiam to this hill is as follows: “ , 146 So.
State v. Bishop 154 So. 30 La. 1934
he trial shall proceed in the following order: “The reading of the plea to the jury; the opening statement of the' district attorney explaining the nature of the charge and the evidence by which ha expects to establish the same; the opening statement by counsel for the defendant at ¡his option explaining the defense and the evidence by which he expects to prove the same;” , 146 So.
State v. Capaci 154 So. 419 La. 1934
744 , , this court also said: “In our opinion the statute requires the district attorney to set forth not only the facts which he expects to prove, but also the evidence, i. e., the nature of the evidence, by which he expects to prove them, whether oral or written, or direct or circumstantial, or confessed.
State v. Newport 151 So. 770 La. 1933
State v. Silsby 152 So. 323 La. 1933
State v. Garrity 152 So. 77 La. 1933
State v. White 150 So. 843 La. 1933
The objections are based on article 333 , 146 So.
State v. Elmore 149 So. 507 La. 1933
Since the statement which defendant is alleged to have made to the police officers must be regarded as a confession and not as .an admission, , 146 So.