defendant raises claim in Louisiana

2004When a defendant raises a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, that claim is evaluated under the two-prong test established by Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

2004When a defendant raises a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, that claim is evaluated under the two-prong test established by Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

2023Id.

2015Id.

1997Hence, whether or *1277 not a defendant raises a claim ... in a motion for a new trial, upon formal assignment of error, we will review whether the defendant's claim ... has merit." 383 So.2d at 1007 .

1980However, in State v. Peoples, 383 So.2d 1006 (La.1980), we held that, whether or not a defendant raises a claim of no evidence in a motion for a new trial, upon formal assignment of error, we will review whether the defendant's claim of no evidence has merit. [2] Defendant did not object on this ground at the time of sentencing.

2017After discussing the division of the Louisiana courts on the issue, this court stated that it "has therefore never adopted which party has what burden of proof when the defendant raises a claim of self-defense in a non-homicide case.” Id. at 463 .

2012Id., at 973 . laaThe instant defendants raised their due process claim in the trial court; however, the trial court did not consider this claim because it granted the defendants’ motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and vacated the jury’s exemplary damage award.

2011The State must prove ‘beyond a reasonable doubt that the [shackling] error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained.”’ Deck, 544 U.S. at 635 , 125 S.Ct. at 2015 -2016 (quoting Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967)). 17 | fflThus, when a defendant raises as error on appeal his being shackled at either the guilt or penalty phase, or both, appellate review is a two-step process.

2011The State must prove ‘beyond a reasonable doubt that the [shackling] error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained.”’ Deck, 544 U.S. at 635 , 125 S.Ct. at 2015 -2016 (quoting Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967)). 17 | fflThus, when a defendant raises as error on appeal his being shackled at either the guilt or penalty phase, or both, appellate review is a two-step process.

2011The State must prove ‘beyond a reasonable doubt that the [shackling] error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained.”’ Deck, 544 U.S. at 635 , 125 S.Ct. at 2015 -2016 (quoting Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967)). 17 | fflThus, when a defendant raises as error on appeal his being shackled at either the guilt or penalty phase, or both, appellate review is a two-step process.

2011The State must prove ‘beyond a reasonable doubt that the [shackling] error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained.”’ Deck, 544 U.S. at 635 , 125 S.Ct. at 2015 -2016 (quoting Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24 , 87 S.Ct. 824 , 17 L.Ed.2d 705 (1967)). 17 | fflThus, when a defendant raises as error on appeal his being shackled at either the guilt or penalty phase, or both, appellate review is a two-step process.

1995State v. Williams, 617 So.2d 557 (La.App. 3 Cir.), writ denied, 623 So.2d 1331 (La.1993).

1995State v. Williams, 617 So.2d 557 (La.App. 3 Cir.), writ denied, 623 So.2d 1331 (La.1993).

1986State v. Martin, 458 So.2d 454 (La.1984); State v. Lynch, 436 So.2d 567 (La.1983).

1986State v. Martin, 458 So.2d 454 (La.1984); State v. Lynch, 436 So.2d 567 (La.1983).

1962Dittmann v. Long, La.App., 114 So.2d 44 .