Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Lagarde, 672 So. 2d 1102.

13 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Samson H. Quinton La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
State v. Alexcee 262 So. 3d 949 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 4/3/96), , 1104 ].
State v. Armstead 159 So. 3d 502 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 4/3/96); ) (internal quotations omit ted).
State v. Trepagnier 154 So. 3d 670 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Olivia 137 So. 3d 752 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Marcelin 131 So. 3d 427 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 4/3/96), ) (internal quotations omitted).
State v. Reyer 129 So. 3d 752 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Hall 127 So. 3d 30 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 4/3/96), ; see also State v. Bremer, 97-0456, p. 3 (La.App.
State v. Franklin 126 So. 3d 663 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 4/3/96), (internal quotations omitted)).
State v. Brooks 124 So. 3d 1129 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 4/3/96), , this court noted: A motion to quash an indictment is treated much like an exception of no cause of action in a civil suit; the court must accept as true the facts contained in the bill of information and the bills of particulars and decide whether or not a crime has been charged.
State v. Guillott 155 So. 3d 551 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 4/3/96), ; State v. Bremer, 97-0456 (La.App.
State v. Schmolke 108 So. 3d 296 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
4 Cir. 4/3/96), ; see also State v. Bremer, 97-0456 (La.App.
State v. Bremer 704 So. 2d 917 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1997
4 Cir. 4/3/96), , writ denied, 96-1111 (La.10/4/96), , we recognized that “[a] motion to quash an indictment is treated much like an exception of no cause of aetion in a civil suit; the court must accept as true the facts contained in the bill of information and the bills of particulars and decide whether or not