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.
12 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2025 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Edwardsgreen2 sentences2018Similar to a Peart claim of ineffective assistance of counsel raised pre-trial, proof of prejudice is not required for a conflict-of-interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [ State v. ] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20 [ (La. 2/9/96) ], 672 So.2d [116] at 125 (relying on Holloway v. Arkansas, 435 U.S. 475 , 98 S.Ct. 1173 , 2009In State v. Cisco, 01-2732, p. 17 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 130 , cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1005 , 124 S.Ct. 2023 , 158 L.Ed.2d 522 (2004) (footnote omitted), the supreme court set forth the defendant’s burden of proof for a conflict of interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [State v.] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20, [ ( | 4 | 5 |
State v. Marshallgreen2 sentences2018Similar to a Peart claim of ineffective assistance of counsel raised pre-trial, proof of prejudice is not required for a conflict-of-interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [ State v. ] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20 [ (La. 2/9/96) ], 672 So.2d [116] at 125 (relying on Holloway v. Arkansas, 435 U.S. 475 , 98 S.Ct. 1173 , 2009In State v. Cisco, 01-2732, p. 17 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 130 , cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1005 , 124 S.Ct. 2023 , 158 L.Ed.2d 522 (2004) (footnote omitted), the supreme court set forth the defendant’s burden of proof for a conflict of interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [State v.] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20, [ ( | 4 | 5 |
State v. Ciscogreen2 sentences2025In order to knowingly and intelligently waive a conflict of interest claim against their counsel, a defendant “must be told (1) that a conflict of interest exists; (2) the consequences to his defense from continuing with conflict-laden counsel; and (3) that he has a right to obtain other counsel.” State v. Cisco, 2001-2732, p. 22 (La. 12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 133 (citations omitted). 2009In State v. Cisco, 01-2732, p. 17 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 130 , cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1005 , 124 S.Ct. 2023 , 158 L.Ed.2d 522 (2004) (footnote omitted), the supreme court set forth the defendant’s burden of proof for a conflict of interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [State v.] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20, [ ( | 1 | 5 |
People v. Savaianogreen2 sentences2014Although there is no Louisiana jurisprudence on point, a similar contention — that a completed contractual agreement was required for a conflict of interest violation — was rejected by the court in People v. Savaiano, 66 Ill.2d 7, 14-15 , 3 Ill.Dec. 836 , 359 N.E.2d 475, 479 (1976). 9 In the Savaiano case, the conflict of interest provision at issue was a criminal statute outlawing a public official from having a prohibited financial interest. 10 Rejecting the defendant’s argument that a completed contract was an essential element of the offense, the court reasoned as follows: To claim that ap 2014Although there is no Louisiana jurisprudence on point, a similar contention — that a completed contractual agreement was required for a conflict of interest violation — was rejected by the court in People v. Savaiano, 66 Ill.2d 7, 14-15 , 3 Ill.Dec. 836 , 359 N.E.2d 475, 479 (1976). 9 In the Savaiano case, the conflict of interest provision at issue was a criminal statute outlawing a public official from having a prohibited financial interest. 10 Rejecting the defendant’s argument that a completed contract was an essential element of the offense, the court reasoned as follows: To claim that ap | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Holloway v. Arkansas
green
2 sentences2018Similar to a Peart claim of ineffective assistance of counsel raised pre-trial, proof of prejudice is not required for a conflict-of-interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [ State v. ] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20 [ (La. 2/9/96) ], 672 So.2d [116] at 125 (relying on Holloway v. Arkansas, 435 U.S. 475 , 98 S.Ct. 1173 , 2018Similar to a Peart claim of ineffective assistance of counsel raised pre-trial, proof of prejudice is not required for a conflict-of-interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [ State v. ] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20 [ (La. 2/9/96) ], 672 So.2d [116] at 125 (relying on Holloway v. Arkansas, 435 U.S. 475 , 98 S.Ct. 1173 , | 5 | 2008–2018 |
Perez Ruiz v. United States
green
2 sentences2009In State v. Cisco, 01-2732, p. 17 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 130 , cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1005 , 124 S.Ct. 2023 , 158 L.Ed.2d 522 (2004) (footnote omitted), the supreme court set forth the defendant’s burden of proof for a conflict of interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [State v.] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20, [ ( 2009In State v. Cisco, 01-2732, p. 17 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 130 , cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1005 , 124 S.Ct. 2023 , 158 L.Ed.2d 522 (2004) (footnote omitted), the supreme court set forth the defendant's burden of proof for a conflict of interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [State v.] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20, [(L | 4 | 2008–2009 |
Louisiana v. Cisco
green
2 sentences2009In State v. Cisco, 01-2732, p. 17 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 130 , cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1005 , 124 S.Ct. 2023 , 158 L.Ed.2d 522 (2004) (footnote omitted), the supreme court set forth the defendant’s burden of proof for a conflict of interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [State v.] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20, [ ( 2009In State v. Cisco, 01-2732, p. 17 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 130 , cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1005 , 124 S.Ct. 2023 , 158 L.Ed.2d 522 (2004) (footnote omitted), the supreme court set forth the defendant's burden of proof for a conflict of interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [State v.] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20, [(L | 4 | 2008–2009 |
Barber v. Ohio University
green
2 sentences2009In State v. Cisco, 01-2732, p. 17 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 130 , cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1005 , 124 S.Ct. 2023 , 158 L.Ed.2d 522 (2004) (footnote omitted), the supreme court set forth the defendant’s burden of proof for a conflict of interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [State v.] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20, [ ( 2009In State v. Cisco, 01-2732, p. 17 (La.12/3/03), 861 So.2d 118, 130 , cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1005 , 124 S.Ct. 2023 , 158 L.Ed.2d 522 (2004) (footnote omitted), the supreme court set forth the defendant's burden of proof for a conflict of interest claim raised pre-trial: In a pretrial context, regardless of how the conflict of interest issue arises, the trial court has two options to avoid a conflict of interest: appoint separate counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether the risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant separate counsel. [State v.] Tart, 94-0025 at 19-20, [(L | 4 | 2008–2009 |
Cuyler v. Sullivan
green
2 sentences2010The Supreme Court revisited Glasser and Holloway in Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 , 100 S.Ct. 1708 , 64 L.Ed.2d 333 (1980), while addressing a conflict of interest claim that was not raised until post conviction proceedings. 2010The Supreme Court revisited Glasser and Holloway in Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 , 100 S.Ct. 1708 , 64 L.Ed.2d 333 (1980), while addressing a conflict of interest claim that was not raised until post conviction proceedings. | 2 | 2003–2010 |
State v. As
neutral
1 sentence2018Similarly, in State v. A.S , 09-555, pp. 5-6 (La.App. 3 Cir. 12/9/09), 24 So.3d 1009 , 1012-13, this court found that remand for an evidentiary hearing was the appropriate remedy when the record did not contain enough information to review a conflict-of-interest claim: Failure to appoint conflict-free counsel or take adequate steps to ascertain whether a risk of a conflict of interest is too remote to warrant conflict-free counsel requires reversal only when an actual conflict exists. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Brumfield
green
1 sentence2014Following this Court’s decision in State v. Brumfield, 09-1084 (La.9/2/09), 16 So.3d 1161 , which held that respondent’s window of opportunity for attacking his 1999 guilty plea on one count of armed robbery, supporting his habitual offender sentence, on a conflict-of-interest claim had closed by virtue of the time limits imposed by La. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Kahey
green
1 sentence2003State v. Kahey, 436 So.2d at 485 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Lowe v. Home Owners' Loan Corporation
green
2 sentences1976In my view, under the very peculiar facts of this case, Ray should be relieved of liability under the rule in Lowe v. Homeowner's Loan Corporation, 199 La. 672 , 6 So.2d 726 (S.Ct., 1942), which held that, absent actual negligence on his part, an owner-lessor is not responsible to a third party on the leased premises for injury caused by a condition resulting from the lessee's failure to fulfill his repair obligations legally imposed by Civil Code Articles 2716 and 2717. 1976In my view, under the very peculiar facts of this case, Ray should be relieved of liability under the rule in Lowe v. Homeowner's Loan Corporation, 199 La. 672 , 6 So.2d 726 (S.Ct., 1942), which held that, absent actual negligence on his part, an owner-lessor is not responsible to a third party on the leased premises for injury caused by a condition resulting from the lessee's failure to fulfill his repair obligations legally imposed by Civil Code Articles 2716 and 2717. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.