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 1975–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Prieurred2 sentences1996No such notice is required as to evidence of offenses which are a part of the res gestae, or convictions used to impeach defendant's testimony. (2) In the written statement the State shall specify the exception to the general exclusionary rule upon which it relies for the admissibility of the evidence of other acts or offenses. (3) Prerequisite to the admissibility of the evidence is a showing by the State that the evidence of other crimes is not merely repetitive and cumulative, is not a subterfuge for depicting the defendant's bad character or his propensity for bad behavior, and that it ser 1995When the prosecution intends to introduce evidence of "other crimes," Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 , requires the State to furnish in writing to the defendant a statement of the acts or wrongful acts about which it intends to offer evidence and the State shall specify the exception to the general exclusionary rule on which it relies to offer evidence of other offenses. | 1 | 10 |
State v. Leegreen1 sentence1994Under State v. Hatcher, 372 So.2d 1024 (La. 1979), in order for such evidence to be admissible: (1) [T]here must be clear and convincing evidence of the commission of the other crimes and the defendant's connection therewith; State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973); see also, State v. Gaines, 340 So.2d 1294, 1298 (La.1977) (concurring opinion); McCormick on Evidence, § 190, pp. 451-52 (2d ed. 1972); (2) the modus operandi employed by the defendant in both the charged and the uncharged offenses must be so peculiarly distinctive that one must logically say they are the work of the same person; | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gainesgreen1 sentence1994Under State v. Hatcher, 372 So.2d 1024 (La. 1979), in order for such evidence to be admissible: (1) [T]here must be clear and convincing evidence of the commission of the other crimes and the defendant's connection therewith; State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973); see also, State v. Gaines, 340 So.2d 1294, 1298 (La.1977) (concurring opinion); McCormick on Evidence, § 190, pp. 451-52 (2d ed. 1972); (2) the modus operandi employed by the defendant in both the charged and the uncharged offenses must be so peculiarly distinctive that one must logically say they are the work of the same person; | 1 | 1 |
State v. Clarkgreen1 sentence1978State v. Banks, 307 So.2d 594 (La.1975); see State v. Clark, 338 So.2d 690 (La. 1976) (concurring opinion by Dennis, J.). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Miller
green
1 sentence2000State v. Miller, 718 So.2d 960 at 962 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
State v. Hatcher
green
1 sentence1994Under State v. Hatcher, 372 So.2d 1024 (La. 1979), in order for such evidence to be admissible: (1) [T]here must be clear and convincing evidence of the commission of the other crimes and the defendant's connection therewith; State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973); see also, State v. Gaines, 340 So.2d 1294, 1298 (La.1977) (concurring opinion); McCormick on Evidence, § 190, pp. 451-52 (2d ed. 1972); (2) the modus operandi employed by the defendant in both the charged and the uncharged offenses must be so peculiarly distinctive that one must logically say they are the work of the same person; | 1 | 1994–1994 |
State v. Jackson
green
1 sentence1994Under State v. Hatcher, 372 So.2d 1024 (La. 1979), in order for such evidence to be admissible: (1) [T]here must be clear and convincing evidence of the commission of the other crimes and the defendant's connection therewith; State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126 (La.1973); see also, State v. Gaines, 340 So.2d 1294, 1298 (La.1977) (concurring opinion); McCormick on Evidence, § 190, pp. 451-52 (2d ed. 1972); (2) the modus operandi employed by the defendant in both the charged and the uncharged offenses must be so peculiarly distinctive that one must logically say they are the work of the same person; | 1 | 1994–1994 |
State v. Banks
green
1 sentence1978State v. Banks, 307 So.2d 594 (La.1975); see State v. Clark, 338 So.2d 690 (La. 1976) (concurring opinion by Dennis, J.). | 1 | 1978–1978 |