Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Louisiana opinions name it 1 courts 2007–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Louisiana courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
James v. United States
red
2 sentences2008As recently as April 18, 2007, in James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 , 127 S.Ct. 1586 , 167 L.Ed.2d 532 (2007), the Supreme Court indicated, albeit in its eighth footnote, that the prior convictions exception remains extant. 2008As recently as April 18, 2007, in James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 , 127 S.Ct. 1586 , 167 L.Ed.2d 532 (2007), the Supreme Court indicated, albeit in its eighth footnote, that the prior convictions exception remains extant. | 2 | 2007–2008 |
Napue v. Illinois
green
2 sentences2018In this timely filed appeal, the defendant challenges: (1) the sufficiency of evidence underlying his convictions; (2) the admission of evidence of similar crimes, wrongs, or acts in domestic abuse cases; and (3) being convicted simultaneously for individual violations of a protective order and stalking a person for whose benefit a protective order was issued. 2 *33 Assignment of Error 1 The defendant argues that the evidence is insufficient to support the convictions for violation of the protective order because there were inconsistencies in the testimony of the witnesses and because, in viol 2018In this timely filed appeal, the defendant challenges: (1) the sufficiency of evidence underlying his convictions; (2) the admission of evidence of similar crimes, wrongs, or acts in domestic abuse cases; and (3) being convicted simultaneously for individual violations of a protective order and stalking a person for whose benefit a protective order was issued. 2 *33 Assignment of Error 1 The defendant argues that the evidence is insufficient to support the convictions for violation of the protective order because there were inconsistencies in the testimony of the witnesses and because, in viol | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Green
green
1 sentence2018Id. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Harris
green
1 sentence2014In State v. Harris, 95-0900 (La.5/19/95), 654 So.2d 680 , following an adjudication as a multiple offender, the defendant applied for post-conviction relief, arguing that the trial court failed to advise him of his rights before he stipulated to his identity. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Colton
neutral
1 sentence2008Colton, 968 So.2d at 1242 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.