9 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1977–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Sciortino v. Department of Policegreen1 sentence1997See Sciortino v. Department of Police, 94-0356 (La.App. 4th Cir. 9/29/94), 643 So.2d 841 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Williamsgreen1 sentence1995The exclusionary rule reaches not only evidence seized as a direct *407 result of an illegal search or seizure, but also evidence later discovered and found to be derivative of an illegality or "fruit of the poisonous tree." State v. Williams, 619 So.2d 650, 654 (La.App. 4th Cir.1993). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gravesgreen2 sentences1977See, e.g., State v. Graves, 259 La. 526 , 250 So.2d 727 (1971); State v. Amphy, 259 La. 161 , 249 So.2d 560 (1971). 1977See, e.g., State v. Graves, 259 La. 526 , 250 So.2d 727 (1971); State v. Amphy, 259 La. 161 , 249 So.2d 560 (1971). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Miranda v. Arizona
green
2 sentences2017After being advised of her rights under Miranda v. Arizona , 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), defendant told police she had taken three Xanax pills, two or three hydrocodone pills and had smoked marijuana the night before the accident. 2017After being advised of her rights under Miranda v. Arizona , 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966), defendant told police she had taken three Xanax pills, two or three hydrocodone pills and had smoked marijuana the night before the accident. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Baughman v. STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. & DEV.
neutral
1 sentence1999Before blood alcohol analysis results can be admitted in a civil or a criminal proceeding, the party seeking to introduce the results must lay a proper foundation by connecting the specimen with the source, showing that it was properly labeled and preserved, properly transported for analysis, properly taken by an authorized person and properly tested. *324 Baughman v. State, Dep't of Transp. and Dev., 28,369 (La.App. 2 Cir. 5/8/96); 674 So.2d 1063 , writ denied, 96-1882 (La.11/1/96); 681 So.2d 1260 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Baughman v. State
neutral
1 sentence1999Before blood alcohol analysis results can be admitted in a civil or a criminal proceeding, the party seeking to introduce the results must lay a proper foundation by connecting the specimen with the source, showing that it was properly labeled and preserved, properly transported for analysis, properly taken by an authorized person and properly tested. *324 Baughman v. State, Dep't of Transp. and Dev., 28,369 (La.App. 2 Cir. 5/8/96); 674 So.2d 1063 , writ denied, 96-1882 (La.11/1/96); 681 So.2d 1260 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Honeyman
green
1 sentence1990State of Louisiana v. Honeyman, 560 So.2d 825 (La.1990). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
State v. Rowell
green
1 sentence1989La.R.S. 32:662(A)(1)(C).” The Commission recognized that the results of the blood test would not be admissible in a criminal proceeding in accordance with State v. Rowell, 517 So.2d 799 (La.1988), but held that they were admissible in an administrative hearing. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
State v. Carter
green
1 sentence1988APPLICABILITY OF PHYSICIAN-PATIENT PRIVILEGE TO MOTIONS TO QUASH AND SUPPRESS (Assignment of Error No. 1) Defendant contends the trial court "erred in failing to quash the subpoena and suppress for use as evidence the personal medical records of the defendant." Defendant's main argument in support of these motions is that all of the hospital records, especially the results of the blood test, are privileged according to La.R.S. 15:476, which provides as follows: No physician is permitted, whether during or after the termination of his employment as such, unless with his patient's express consen | 1 | 1988–1988 |
State v. Singer
green
1 sentence1986Citing State v. Singer, 457 So.2d 690 (La.App. 4th Cir.), writ denied, 458 So.2d 465 (La.1984), he argues that suppression of the test results is mandated because he was not advised of the consequences which would result from a test reading of .10 percent or above. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
State v. Singer
green
1 sentence1986Citing State v. Singer, 457 So.2d 690 (La.App. 4th Cir.), writ denied, 458 So.2d 465 (La.1984), he argues that suppression of the test results is mandated because he was not advised of the consequences which would result from a test reading of .10 percent or above. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
State v. Amphy
green
2 sentences1977See, e.g., State v. Graves, 259 La. 526 , 250 So.2d 727 (1971); State v. Amphy, 259 La. 161 , 249 So.2d 560 (1971). 1977See, e.g., State v. Graves, 259 La. 526 , 250 So.2d 727 (1971); State v. Amphy, 259 La. 161 , 249 So.2d 560 (1971). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
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.