limiting jury instruction (Louisiana) · Go Syfert
← Louisiana issues

limiting jury instruction in Louisiana

11 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1986–2023 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Prieurred
la · 1973 · cited in 3 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1997–2005
2 sentences

2005The Louisiana Supreme Court recognized the danger of introduction of other convictions or acts of misconduct in State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126, 128 (La.1973): "* * * the natural and inevitable tendency of the tribunal — whether judge or jury — is to give excessive weight to the vicious record of crime thus exhibited, and either to allow it to bear too strongly on the present charge, or to take the proof of it as justifying a condemnation irrespective of guilt of the present charge. * * *" 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 194 (3rd Edition).

2002The Louisiana Supreme Court recognized the danger of introduction of other convictions or acts of misconduct in State v. Prieur, 277 So.2d 126, 128 (La.1973): "* * * the natural and inevitable tendency of the tribunal—whether judge or jury—is to give excessive weight to the vicious record of crime thus exhibited, and either to allow it to bear too strongly on the present charge, or to take the proof of it as justifying a condemnation irrespective of guilt of the present charge. * * *" 1 Wigmore, Evidence § 194 (3rd Edition).

33

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 (11)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Green green
la · 1986
2 sentences

2016In Green, supra, a defendant appealing a third degree theft conviction complained on appeal that the statute of his conviction was unconstitutional because it authorized the use of his prior convictions as evidence of his present guilt without mandating a limiting jury instruction that the prior convictions were relevant only as to enhanced punishment.

2007S[tat]. 14:67 within the requirements of the Due Process Clause, which we believe mandates a limiting jury instruction in the third offense theft recidivist trials." Green, 493 So.2d at 592 .

51995–2016
Spencer v. Texas green
scotus · 1966
2 sentences

2002In ruling that a one-stage recidivist trial procedure would, in the absence of a mandatory limiting jury instruction "fall below the minimum level the Fourteenth Amendment will tolerate," the Supreme Court relied on the United States Supreme Court case Spencer v. Texas, 385 U.S. 554 , 87 S.Ct. 648 , 17 L.Ed.2d 606 (1967).

2002In ruling that a one-stage recidivist trial procedure would, in the absence of a mandatory limiting jury instruction "fall below the minimum level the Fourteenth Amendment will tolerate," the Supreme Court relied on the United States Supreme Court case Spencer v. Texas, 385 U.S. 554 , 87 S.Ct. 648 , 17 L.Ed.2d 606 (1967).

21986–2002
State v. Bibbins neutral
lactapp · 2018
1 sentence

2023This Court held that the trial court had not “abused its discretion in allowing the other crimes and acts into evidence to establish Mr. Bibbins’ identity, particularly given the trial court’s limiting jury instruction,” and stated that “without that other crimes evidence, there is a lack of evidence linking the person nicknamed “Mo” with Mr. Bibbins.” Id., at pp. 13-14, 258 So.3d at 144-45 .

12023–2023
State v. CURINGTON green
lactapp · 2010
1 sentence

2018App. 5 Cir. 10/26/10), 51 So.3d 764 , 771, writ denied , 2010-2612 (La. 4/8/11), 61 So.3d 684 (the courts held that since the defendants did not timely raise an objection to the admission of "other crimes" evidence without a limiting jury instruction, they are precluded from raising the issue on appeal).

12018–2018
State v. Caliste green
la · 2011
1 sentence

2018App. 5 Cir. 10/26/10), 51 So.3d 764 , 771, writ denied , 2010-2612 (La. 4/8/11), 61 So.3d 684 (the courts held that since the defendants did not timely raise an objection to the admission of "other crimes" evidence without a limiting jury instruction, they are precluded from raising the issue on appeal).

12018–2018
State v. Franklin green
lactapp · 1997
1 sentence

2002The court also noted that the procedure here passed constitutional muster since, in accord with State v. Green, 493 So.2d 588 (La.1986), a limiting jury instruction that the defendant's past convictions are not to be taken into account in assessing his guilt or innocence of the primary offense charged, was given, so that the one-stage recidivist trial procedure did not "fall below the minimum level the fourteenth amendment will tolerate." In a subsequent case, State v. Franklin, 96-1346 (La.App. 3rd Cir.4/16/97), 693 So.2d 219 , writs denied, 97-2129 (La.3/13/98), 712 So.2d 867 , where the def

12002–2002
State v. Williams neutral
lactapp · 1997
1 sentence

2002The Third Circuit was again presented with the same issue in State v. Williams, 96-476 (La.App. 3rd Cir.4/30/97), 693 So.2d 870 , writs denied, 97-1365 (La.10/31/97), 703 So.2d 20 , upon which the defense relies.

12002–2002
State v. Franklin green
la · 1998
1 sentence

2002The court also noted that the procedure here passed constitutional muster since, in accord with State v. Green, 493 So.2d 588 (La.1986), a limiting jury instruction that the defendant's past convictions are not to be taken into account in assessing his guilt or innocence of the primary offense charged, was given, so that the one-stage recidivist trial procedure did not "fall below the minimum level the fourteenth amendment will tolerate." In a subsequent case, State v. Franklin, 96-1346 (La.App. 3rd Cir.4/16/97), 693 So.2d 219 , writs denied, 97-2129 (La.3/13/98), 712 So.2d 867 , where the def

12002–2002
State v. Parfait neutral
la · 1997
1 sentence

2002The Third Circuit was again presented with the same issue in State v. Williams, 96-476 (La.App. 3rd Cir.4/30/97), 693 So.2d 870 , writs denied, 97-1365 (La.10/31/97), 703 So.2d 20 , upon which the defense relies.

12002–2002
State v. Bouzigard green
la · 1973
1 sentence

2002The court also noted that the procedure here passed constitutional muster since, in accord with State v. Green, 493 So.2d 588 (La.1986), a limiting jury instruction that the defendant's past convictions are not to be taken into account in assessing his guilt or innocence of the primary offense charged, was given, so that the one-stage recidivist trial procedure did not "fall below the minimum level the fourteenth amendment will tolerate." In a subsequent case, State v. Franklin, 96-1346 (La.App. 3rd Cir.4/16/97), 693 So.2d 219 , writs denied, 97-2129 (La.3/13/98), 712 So.2d 867 , where the def

12002–2002
State v. Goza green
la · 1982
1 sentence

1988“Even if the evidence is ultimately admissible, the defendant is entitled as a matter of fairness to notice of the particular offenses which the State intends to prove and to an opportunity to prepare any defense he may have against them.” State v. Goza, supra at 1353 .

11988–1988

Statutes the citing opinions construe

LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:67 (6) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 40:967 (5) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 40:982 (5) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 40:966 (4) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 15:529.1 (3) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 40:968 (3) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 40:969 (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

PA 14 (2004–2023) LA 11 (1986–2023) OH 11 (2001–2025) IL 8 (1977–2026) WV 8 (2013–2022) TX 7 (1982–2020) CA 6 (1988–2017) TN 6 (1995–2019) WA 5 (2011–2019) AZ 5 (1983–2010) KS 5 (2004–2022) OR 5 (1986–2026) IA 4 (2013–2024) MI 4 (2014–2025) NC 4 (2000–2025) NJ 4 (1988–2019) NY 3 (1995–2018) NV 2 (2015–2016) WI 2 (2024–2025) UT 2 (2002–2011) IN 2 (1992–1996) MS 2 (2012–2017) MT 2 (2015–2015) GA 2 (2018–2018) NM 2 (2017–2018) ID 2 (1992–2000) MD 2 (1981–2012)

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