line defense in Louisiana

2019While the State filed notice of intent to introduce other crimes evidence with respect to these prior shootings, arguing that they would be relevant to defendant’s “intent, motive, preparation, plan, identity, and opportunity,” we caution, as we did in State v. Taylor, 16-1124 (La. 12/1/16), 217 So.3d 283 , against the reliance on boilerplate language in this area.

2016As defense counsel pursued substantially the same line of inquiry with prospective juror Mr. Claude Clary, Jr., the state objected when counsel divulged further that she anticipated the state would attempt to show that defendant acted as a principal in another homicide: 15 In Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719, 726 , 112 S.Ct. 2222 , 119 L.Ed. 2d 492 (1992), the Supreme Court held that venire members who would automatically vote for the death penalty must be excluded for cause, reasoning that any prospective juror automatically voting for death would fail to consider the evidence of the aggravat

2016As defense counsel pursued substantially the same line of inquiry with prospective juror Mr. Claude Clary, Jr., the state objected when counsel divulged further that she anticipated the state would attempt to show that defendant acted as a principal in another homicide: 15 In Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719, 726 , 112 S.Ct. 2222 , 119 L.Ed. 2d 492 (1992), the Supreme Court held that venire members who would automatically vote for the death penalty must be excluded for cause, reasoning that any prospective juror automatically voting for death would fail to consider the evidence of the aggravat

1994United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 , 104 S.Ct. 2039 , 80 L.Ed.2d 657 (1984); Strickland, supra. We are somewhat concerned as it remains unclear why trial counsel did not have these past medical records, nor is it clear why defense counsel did not pursue this line of defense at trial.

1994United States v. Cronic, 466 U.S. 648 , 104 S.Ct. 2039 , 80 L.Ed.2d 657 (1984); Strickland, supra. We are somewhat concerned as it remains unclear why trial counsel did not have these past medical records, nor is it clear why defense counsel did not pursue this line of defense at trial.

1984This line of analysis was applied in State v. Vincent, 387 So.2d 1097 (La.1980), where the court equated the date of discharge from parole with the expiration of maximum sentence for defendant's last prior felony conviction.

1983La.R.S. 15:493, 496 and 497. [3] The defendant does not claim that the attempt by the prosecutor to introduce the police report into evidence during rebuttal argument constitutes a peremptory ground for a mistrial contemplated by La.C.Cr.P. art. 770. [4] In State v. Dawson, 392 So.2d 445 (La.1980), a case involving aggravated rape for which a mandatory life sentence is required, the court observed as follows: "The charge to the jury concerning the penalties for the responsive verdicts was within the trial court's discretion.

1977The trial judge is vested with broad discretion in determining the relevancy of evidence, La.R.S. 15:435, 15:441; State v. Nero, 319 So.2d 303 (La. 1975), and we find no abuse of that discretion here.

1977La.C.Cr.P. art. 841; State v. Marcell, 320 So.2d 195 (La.1975).

1972This court stated in its syllabus in State v. McIntosh, 141 La. at 150 , 74 So. at 886 : “Where, in the examination, on voir dire, of proposed jurors, defendant adopts a line of inquiry obviously intended to be directed to all the jurors, with a view of ascertaining their opinions upon a question, to arise in the case, which he considers important to his interest, and the inquiry is suppressed by the ruling of the trial judge, defendant is entitled to a review of such ruling, on the appeal, even though he may not have exhausted his peremptory challenges in the impaneling of the jury, since, if

1972This court stated in its syllabus in State v. McIntosh, 141 La. at 150 , 74 So. at 886 : “Where, in the examination, on voir dire, of proposed jurors, defendant adopts a line of inquiry obviously intended to be directed to all the jurors, with a view of ascertaining their opinions upon a question, to arise in the case, which he considers important to his interest, and the inquiry is suppressed by the ruling of the trial judge, defendant is entitled to a review of such ruling, on the appeal, even though he may not have exhausted his peremptory challenges in the impaneling of the jury, since, if

1967In this case this Court held, quoting from Louisiana and A. Railway Co. v. Louisiana Railway *17 and Navigation Company, 125 La. 756 , 51 So. 712 , as follows: "`The necessity for the exercise for the right of eminent domain must be understood in a reasonable sense, with due regard to the needs of the plaintiff corporation and all the elements of judicious selection.

1967In this case this Court held, quoting from Louisiana and A. Railway Co. v. Louisiana Railway *17 and Navigation Company, 125 La. 756 , 51 So. 712 , as follows: "`The necessity for the exercise for the right of eminent domain must be understood in a reasonable sense, with due regard to the needs of the plaintiff corporation and all the elements of judicious selection.

1967This Court passed on this same line of defense in Gulf States Utilities Co. v. Heck, 191 So.2d 761 (Writs refused Dec. 12, 1966, 249 La. 1021 , 192 So.2d 370 ).

1967This Court passed on this same line of defense in Gulf States Utilities Co. v. Heck, 191 So.2d 761 (Writs refused Dec. 12, 1966, 249 La. 1021 , 192 So.2d 370 ).

1967This Court passed on this same line of defense in Gulf States Utilities Co. v. Heck, 191 So.2d 761 (Writs refused Dec. 12, 1966, 249 La. 1021 , 192 So.2d 370 ).

1912Jur. p. 772; State v. McCort, 23 La.