Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Toledano, 396 So. 2d 1242.

15 citing documents.

Hirst v. Thieneman 905 So. 2d 343 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2005
1 Cir.1980), writs refused, and (La.
Hirst v. Thieneman 901 So. 2d 578 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
1 Cir.1980), *583 writs refused, and (La.App.
Cole v. Department of Public Safety 825 So. 2d 1134 La. 2002
1 Cir.1980), writs refused, and (La.App.
Reeves v. Structural Preservation Systems 731 So. 2d 208 La. 1999
1 Cir.1980), writs refused, and (La.App.
Bridges v. Carl E. Woodward, Inc. 663 So. 2d 458 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1995
1st Cir.), writs denied, , (La.
Williams v. Gervais F. Favrot Co., Inc. 573 So. 2d 533 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
1st Cir.1980), writs refused and (1981).
State v. James 545 So. 2d 560 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
this Court stated: "The line-up in the instant case was conducted during the investigation of the crime, before the bill of information was filed and before the preliminary hearing was held.
Walker v. Grantham 449 So. 2d 12 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
1st Cir.1980), writ denied, , (La.
State v. Pittman 428 So. 2d 979 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
the Court stated: Since granting writs in the present case, however, that the *982 Payton rule will not be applied retroactively.
State v. Frisco 411 So. 2d 37 La. 1982
State v. Toledano 408 So. 2d 1252 La. 1982
State v. Edmond 399 So. 2d 187 La. 1981
this court declined to apply Payton and Brown retroactively.
State v. Smith 396 So. 2d 879 La. 1981
(Dennis, J., dissenting).
State v. Pittman 397 So. 2d 1297 La. 1981
Absent exigent circumstances, that threshold may not reasonably be crossed without a warrant.” Since granting writs in the present case, however, that the Payton , rule will not be applied retroactively.
State v. Monroe 397 So. 2d 1258 La. 1981
After submission of the instant case, in which it was held that Payton will not be applied retroactively.