defendant cannot claim (Louisiana) · Go Syfert
← Louisiana issues

defendant cannot claim in Louisiana

29 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1920–2019 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.

Followed or applied (11)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Martingreen
la · 1984 · cited in 4 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2018
2 sentences

2018See State v. Martin, 458 So.2d 454 , 460 (La.1984) ; State v. Wiltz, 2008-1441, p. 7 (La.

2018See State v. Martin, 458 So.2d 454 , 460 (La.1984) ; State v. Wiltz, 2008-1441, p. 7 (La.

44
State v. Baylisgreen
la · 1980 · cited in 3 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2000–2014
2 sentences

2014State v. Galindo, 2006-1090, p. 14 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/8/07), 968 So.2d 1102, 1112-111 ; State v. Dank, 99-0390, pp. 10-11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/24/00) , 764 So.2d 148, 158 ; State v. Biagas, 99-2652, p. 11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 2/16/00), 754 So.2d 1111,1117-1118 , citing State v. Baylis, 388 So.2d 713, 720-721 (La.1980).

2000"When a trial court sustains an objection to the prosecutor's remarks and defense counsel fails to request an admonition or mistrial, the defendant cannot claim the comment was prejudicial." State v. Biagas, supra ; State v. Baylis, supra .

33
State v. Smithgreen
lactapp · 2008 · cited in 5 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2014–2016
2 sentences

2015Therefore, a defendant cannot challenge the sufficiency of the evidence after he pleads guilty.”) (citing State v. Smith, 07-815, p. 4 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/11/08), 982 So.2d 821, 824, n. 3 ); State v. Lewis, 10-1022, p. 4 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/27/11), 75 So.3d 495, 498 .

2014Therefore, a defendant cannot challenge the sufficiency of the evidence after he pleads guilty.”) (citing State v. Smith, 07-815, p. 4 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/11/08), 982 So.2d 821 , 824 n. 3; State v. Robinson, 09-1269, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/12/10), 38 So.3d 1138, 1141 ).

15
State v. Smithgreen
lactapp · 2012 · cited in 2 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2014–2019
2 sentences

2019See La.C.E. arts. 801(D), 803, 803.1, 804.8 Hearsay is generally not allowed “because the value a jury places on a statement depends upon its declarant, and the defendant cannot challenge the declarant’s credibility by cross-examination or other safeguards of reliability if the declarant is not present at trial.” State v. Smith, 2011-0091, p. 13 (La.App. 4 Cir. 7/11/12), 96 So.3d 678, 687 .

2014App. 4 Cir. 7/11/12), 96 So.3d 678, 687 ; State v. Martin, 458 So.2d 454, 460 (La. 1984).

12
State v. Kimblegreen
la · 1979 · cited in 2 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2006–2011
2 sentences

2011State v. Tribbet, 415 So.2d 182 (La.1982); State v. Kimble, 375 So.2d 924 (La.1979).

2006Citing State v. Kimble, 375 So.2d 924, 928 (La. 1979), the supreme court reiterated its position that the state cannot be charged with testimony elicited by defense counsel implying that the defendant had previously committed the other crimes, and the defendant cannot claim reversible error on the basis of that which he elicited.

12
State v. Greenberrygreen
lactapp · 2014 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019App. 4 Cir. 11/19/14), 154 So.3d 700, 708 (citing State v. Smith, 11-0091, p.13 (La.

11
State v. Doziergreen
lactapp · 1998 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
1 sentence

2009In so doing, the first circuit cited to State v. Tribbet, 415 So.2d 182 , (La.1982), for the premise that “the state cannot be charged with testimony elicited by defense counsel implying that the defendant had previously committed the other crimes, and the defendant cannot claim reversible error on the basis of that which he elicited.” Johnson, 951 So.2d at 301 ; see also State v. Dozier, 97-1564, (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/20/98), 713 So.2d 729 , writ denied, 98-1694 (La.11/25/98), 729 So.2d 573 .

11
State v. Doziergreen
la · 1998 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
1 sentence

2009In so doing, the first circuit cited to State v. Tribbet, 415 So.2d 182 , (La.1982), for the premise that “the state cannot be charged with testimony elicited by defense counsel implying that the defendant had previously committed the other crimes, and the defendant cannot claim reversible error on the basis of that which he elicited.” Johnson, 951 So.2d at 301 ; see also State v. Dozier, 97-1564, (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/20/98), 713 So.2d 729 , writ denied, 98-1694 (La.11/25/98), 729 So.2d 573 .

11
State v. Mazegreen
lactapp · 1992 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998
1 sentence

1998See also State v. Maze, 596 So.2d 218 (La.App. 3 Cir.), writ denied, 604 So.2d 963 (La.1992).

11
State v. Mazegreen
la · 1992 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998
1 sentence

1998See also State v. Maze, 596 So.2d 218 (La.App. 3 Cir.), writ denied, 604 So.2d 963 (La.1992).

11
Aucoin v. Houston Fire & Casualty Co.green
lactapp · 1950 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1962–1962
1 sentence

1962See Aucoin v. Houston Fire & Casualty Co., La.App., 44 So.2d 127 ; Hooper v. Toye Bros.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (21)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Smith green
la · 2008
2 sentences

2016State v. Smith, 07-815 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/11/08) , 982 So.2d 821 , 824 n.3, writ denied, 08-927 (La. 11/14/08), 996 So.2d 1088 .

2016State v. Smith, 07-815 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/11/08) , 982 So.2d 821 , 824 n. 3, writ denied, 08-927 (La. 11/14/08), 996 So.2d 1088 .

42013–2016
State v. Tribbet green
la · 1982
2 sentences

2009In so doing, the first circuit cited to State v. Tribbet, 415 So.2d 182 , (La.1982), for the premise that “the state cannot be charged with testimony elicited by defense counsel implying that the defendant had previously committed the other crimes, and the defendant cannot claim reversible error on the basis of that which he elicited.” Johnson, 951 So.2d at 301 ; see also State v. Dozier, 97-1564, (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/20/98), 713 So.2d 729 , writ denied, 98-1694 (La.11/25/98), 729 So.2d 573 .

1991The Supreme Court, in State v. Tribbet, 415 So.2d 182 (La.1982), held that when the defense counsel elicited testimony which implied that the defendant had previously committed other crimes, the state could not be held responsible for such testimony and the defendant cannot claim reversible error on the basis of that testimony which he elicited.

41991–2011
State v. Biagas green
lactapp · 2000
2 sentences

2014State v. Galindo, 2006-1090, p. 14 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/8/07), 968 So.2d 1102, 1112-111 ; State v. Dank, 99-0390, pp. 10-11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/24/00) , 764 So.2d 148, 158 ; State v. Biagas, 99-2652, p. 11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 2/16/00), 754 So.2d 1111,1117-1118 , citing State v. Baylis, 388 So.2d 713, 720-721 (La.1980).

2007State v. Dank, 99-0390, pp. 10-11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/24/00) , 764 So.2d 148, 158 ; State v. Biagas, 99-2652, p. 11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 2/16/00), 754 So.2d 1111, 1117-18 , citing State v. Baylis, 388 So.2d 713, 720-721 (La.1980).

32000–2014
State v. Dank green
lactapp · 2000
2 sentences

2014State v. Galindo, 2006-1090, p. 14 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/8/07), 968 So.2d 1102, 1112-111 ; State v. Dank, 99-0390, pp. 10-11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/24/00) , 764 So.2d 148, 158 ; State v. Biagas, 99-2652, p. 11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 2/16/00), 754 So.2d 1111,1117-1118 , citing State v. Baylis, 388 So.2d 713, 720-721 (La.1980).

2007State v. Dank, 99-0390, pp. 10-11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/24/00) , 764 So.2d 148, 158 ; State v. Biagas, 99-2652, p. 11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 2/16/00), 754 So.2d 1111, 1117-18 , citing State v. Baylis, 388 So.2d 713, 720-721 (La.1980).

22007–2014
State v. Lewis green
lactapp · 2011
1 sentence

2015Therefore, a defendant cannot challenge the sufficiency of the evidence after he pleads guilty.”) (citing State v. Smith, 07-815, p. 4 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/11/08), 982 So.2d 821, 824, n. 3 ); State v. Lewis, 10-1022, p. 4 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/27/11), 75 So.3d 495, 498 .

12015–2015
State v. Galindo green
lactapp · 2007
1 sentence

2014State v. Galindo, 2006-1090, p. 14 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/8/07), 968 So.2d 1102, 1112-111 ; State v. Dank, 99-0390, pp. 10-11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/24/00) , 764 So.2d 148, 158 ; State v. Biagas, 99-2652, p. 11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 2/16/00), 754 So.2d 1111,1117-1118 , citing State v. Baylis, 388 So.2d 713, 720-721 (La.1980).

12014–2014
State v. Robinson green
lactapp · 2010
1 sentence

2014Therefore, a defendant cannot challenge the sufficiency of the evidence after he pleads guilty.”) (citing State v. Smith, 07-815, p. 4 (La.App. 5 Cir. 3/11/08), 982 So.2d 821 , 824 n. 3; State v. Robinson, 09-1269, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/12/10), 38 So.3d 1138, 1141 ).

12014–2014
State v. Wiltz green
lactapp · 2009
1 sentence

2012See State v. Martin, 458 So.2d 454, 460 (La.1984); State v. Wiltz, 2008-1441, p. 7 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/16/09), 28 So.3d 554, 559 .

12012–2012
State v. Crosby green
la · 1976
1 sentence

2011Id.

12011–2011
State v. Johnson green
lactapp · 2006
1 sentence

2009In so doing, the first circuit cited to State v. Tribbet, 415 So.2d 182 , (La.1982), for the premise that “the state cannot be charged with testimony elicited by defense counsel implying that the defendant had previously committed the other crimes, and the defendant cannot claim reversible error on the basis of that which he elicited.” Johnson, 951 So.2d at 301 ; see also State v. Dozier, 97-1564, (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/20/98), 713 So.2d 729 , writ denied, 98-1694 (La.11/25/98), 729 So.2d 573 .

12009–2009
Berry v. Louisiana green
scotus · 1976
2 sentences

2000That statute, as mentioned previously, provides that "[i]f the circumstances indicate that because of a mental disease or mental defect the offender was incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong with reference to the conduct in question, the offender shall be exempt from criminal responsibility." In State v. Berry, 324 So.2d 822 (La.1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 954 , 96 S.Ct. 1731 , 48 L.Ed.2d 198 (1976), the supreme court held that "this legislative choice does not admit of judicial substitution of another test allegedly more scientifically based on modern psychiatric knowledge." T

2000That statute, as mentioned previously, provides that "[i]f the circumstances indicate that because of a mental disease or mental defect the offender was incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong with reference to the conduct in question, the offender shall be exempt from criminal responsibility." In State v. Berry, 324 So.2d 822 (La.1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 954 , 96 S.Ct. 1731 , 48 L.Ed.2d 198 (1976), the supreme court held that "this legislative choice does not admit of judicial substitution of another test allegedly more scientifically based on modern psychiatric knowledge." T

12000–2000
State v. Berry green
la · 1975
2 sentences

2000State v. Johanson, 332 So.2d 270 (La.1976); State v. Berry, supra ; State v. Frezal, 278 So.2d 64 (La.1973).

2000That statute, as mentioned previously, provides that "[i]f the circumstances indicate that because of a mental disease or mental defect the offender was incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong with reference to the conduct in question, the offender shall be exempt from criminal responsibility." In State v. Berry, 324 So.2d 822 (La.1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 954 , 96 S.Ct. 1731 , 48 L.Ed.2d 198 (1976), the supreme court held that "this legislative choice does not admit of judicial substitution of another test allegedly more scientifically based on modern psychiatric knowledge." T

12000–2000
State v. Frezal green
la · 1973
1 sentence

2000State v. Johanson, 332 So.2d 270 (La.1976); State v. Berry, supra ; State v. Frezal, 278 So.2d 64 (La.1973).

12000–2000
State v. Johanson neutral
la · 1976
1 sentence

2000State v. Johanson, 332 So.2d 270 (La.1976); State v. Berry, supra ; State v. Frezal, 278 So.2d 64 (La.1973).

12000–2000
State v. Billiot neutral
lactapp · 1988
1 sentence

1999State v. Billiot, 521 So.2d 763 (La.App. 2d Cir. 1988).

11999–1999
State v. Martin green
la · 1983
1 sentence

1997In the earlier case of State v. Martin, 427 So.2d 1182 (La. 1983), the. court held that when the predicate conviction is based on a guilty plea, the guilty plea is proved only by a minute entry which is silent as to whether counsel was present, and the defendant does not object at the trial of the multiple offender hearing, then a presumption of regularity attaches to that silent minute entry; the defendant cannot challenge it for the first time on appeal.

11997–1997
State v. Cass green
la · 1977
1 sentence

1996State v. Cass, supra. The defendant has failed to show any prejudice as a result of the state's failure to disclose the entirety of the witnesses' statements.

11996–1996
State v. Green green
lactapp · 1984
1 sentence

1985State v. Latin, 412 So.2d 1357 (La.1982); State v. Green, 448 So.2d 782 (2nd Cir.1984).

11985–1985
State v. Latin green
la · 1982
1 sentence

1985State v. Latin, 412 So.2d 1357 (La.1982); State v. Green, 448 So.2d 782 (2nd Cir.1984).

11985–1985
State v. Taylor green
la · 1892
11924–1924
Rio v. Gordon neutral
la · 1840
11920–1920

Statutes the citing opinions construe

LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 15:529.1 (6) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:30.1 (5) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:64 (5) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:43.1 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

IL 97 (1941–2026) OH 85 (1998–2026) WA 48 (1904–2026) TX 43 (1855–2023) PA 40 (1907–2025) CA 39 (1915–2026) NY 35 (1873–2026) LA 29 (1920–2019) AL 21 (1912–2009) KS 21 (1885–2024) CT 18 (1983–2018) MI 15 (1886–2023) FL 12 (1947–2015) MA 11 (1942–2025) IN 10 (1983–2019) NM 9 (1938–2023) AZ 9 (1973–2026) MO 9 (1990–2025) OR 8 (1897–2023) NC 7 (1978–2009) CO 6 (1990–2025) DC 6 (1994–2016) ID 6 (1909–2026) VA 5 (1990–2026) WI 5 (1975–1993) SD 5 (1975–2014) IA 4 (1907–2024) VT 4 (2003–2007) MT 4 (1980–2016) MS 4 (2015–2026) UT 3 (1968–2019) RI 3 (1980–1990) NJ 3 (1905–1983) KY 3 (1934–2025) ME 3 (1975–1996) AK 2 (1981–2010) AR 2 (2009–2009) TN 2 (1963–2026) ND 2 (1962–2023) DE 2 (2020–2025) OK 2 (1912–1936)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check