Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Burley v. Louisiana Power & Light Co., 331 So. 2d 455.

75 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Steve Derozal Williams La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2026
State of Louisiana v. Demyron L. Skinner La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
In such circumstances, a defendant is entitled to introduce evidence of the decedent’s prior threats or violent character for two distinct purposes: (1) to show defendant’s reasonable apprehension of danger which would justify his conduct; and (2) to help determine who was the aggressor in the conflict.” (La.
State of Louisiana v. Willie Derrick Jackson La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2023
State of Louisiana v. Charles Kennell La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2022
State Of Louisiana v. Randall Paul Burton La. 2021
In such circumstances, a defendant is entitled to introduce evidence of the decedent’s prior threats or violent character “for two distinct purposes: (1) to show defendant’s reasonable apprehension of danger which would justify his conduct; and (2) to help determine who was the aggressor in the conflict.” (La.
State of Louisiana v. Clifford Williams La. 2020
State v. Williams 265 So. 3d 902 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2019
State v. Lee , , 459 (La.
State v. Bratton 161 So. 3d 937 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
Once the defendant has presented appreciable evidence of the overt act, “the trial court cannot exercise its discretion to infringe on the fact-determination function of the jury by disbelieving this defense testimony and thus, deny the accused a defense permitted by law.” See State v. Woodhead, 866 So.2d at 1002 ().
State v. Jones 165 So. 3d 74 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2013
State v. Thomas 106 So. 3d 665 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
4 Cir. 6/5/96), , as follows: The evidence tending to establish an overt act must be “appreciable.” original opinion reinstated on reh’g (La.
State v. Palmer 57 So. 3d 1099 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
-459 (La.1976); (La.App.
State v. Lee 52 So. 3d 210 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
654, 658-59 , (1966) (), and permitted reference to the indorsement to clarify the meaning of the indictment.
State v. Marshall 6 So. 3d 1051 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2009
State v. Edwards, supra; (La.App.
State v. Sartain 2 So. 3d 1132 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
State v. Brooks, 98-1151 (La.App.
State v. Lathan 953 So. 2d 890 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
State v. Woodhead, supra
State v. Johnson 940 So. 2d 711 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2006
See State v. Woodhead, 866 So.2d at 1002 ( , 459 (La.1975)).
State v. Juniors 915 So. 2d 291 La. 2005
State v. Woodhead 866 So. 2d 995 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
State v. Taylor 850 So. 2d 5 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
4 Cir. 6/5/96) , , as follows: The evidence tending to establish an overt act must be “appreciable.” original opinion reinstated on reh’g (La.1976).
State v. Williams 822 So. 2d 764 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
the judge noted during the trial that one of the jurors appeared to be taking notes.
State v. Felder 809 So. 2d 360 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
Finally, the defendant, as well as two other defense witnesses, testified the defendant only shot the victim after he swung at and cut the defendant with a knife.
State v. Brooks 734 So. 2d 1232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1999
( ), the Louisiana Supreme Court held: Evidence of the victim's dangerous character or threats against the accused supports a plea of self-defense because it is relevant to show that the victim was the aggressor and to show that defendant's apprehension of danger was reasonable.
State v. Schexnayder 708 So. 2d 851 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1998
State v. Washington 706 So. 2d 203 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1998
State v. Edwards, supra, 420 So.2d at 669 ; -459 (La.1975); (La.App.
State v. Demery 679 So. 2d 518 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1996
State v. James 675 So. 2d 1224 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
original opinion reinstated on reh'g (La.1976).
State v. Terry 654 So. 2d 455 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1995
State v. Ducre 596 So. 2d 1372 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Martin 562 So. 2d 468 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
State v. Bland 558 So. 2d 719 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
State v. Johnson 553 So. 2d 865 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Anderson 550 So. 2d 797 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Carter 550 So. 2d 805 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Eishtadt 531 So. 2d 1133 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
State v. Copeland 530 So. 2d 526 La. 1988
739, 753 , overruled on other grounds
State v. Freeman 521 So. 2d 783 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
State v. Tarver 521 So. 2d 601 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Brown 522 So. 2d 1110 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
the Supreme Court held that, once an overt act is established, evidence of the victim's dangerous character or of his threats against the accused is admissible in support of a plea of self-defense for two distinct purposes: (1) to show defendant's reasonable apprehension of danger which would justify his co
State v. Whiticar 487 So. 2d 514 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1986
State v. Bullock 476 So. 2d 1008 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
I. Wigmore on Evidence, 363 (3rd ed.1940); McCormick on Evidence, sec.
Wooten v. Louisiana Power & Light Co. 477 So. 2d 1142 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
NOTES [1] Meche, line 23 feet above ground where plaintiff was raising a television antenna; 11-foot diagonal clearance; Burley v. Louisiana Power & Light, write denied, 5-foot 7-inch horizontal clearance; Stansbury v. Mayor and Councilmen of Morgan City, 228 La.
State v. Hardeman 467 So. 2d 1163 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
State v. Willis 459 So. 2d 221 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Martin 458 So. 2d 454 La. 1984
State v. Jones 451 So. 2d 1181 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
State v. Sylvester 438 So. 2d 1277 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
State v. Johnson 438 So. 2d 1221 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1983
State v. Bryan 427 So. 2d 1169 La. 1983
State v. Gipson 427 So. 2d 1293 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1983
State v. Pierce 422 So. 2d 1157 La. 1982