54 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1974–2019 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. Wilsongreen2 sentences2011State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985); State v. Burns, 44,937, p. 12 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2/2/10), 32 So.3d 261, 270 (citing LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 228; United States v. Edwards, 415 U.S. 800 , 94 S.Ct. 1234 , 39 L.Ed.2d 771 (1974); Wilson, supra; State v. Nuccio, 454 So.2d 93 (La.1984)). 2006In State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985), this court held "the right of the police to conduct a personal effects inventory search at the time of an arrested person's booking is a recognized exception to the search warrant requirement." This right to seize items after lawful arrest and during booking is not completely unfettered, as the item seized must be contraband, an instrumentality of the crime, a fruit of the crime, or evidence of a crime. | 2 | 4 |
State v. Duperongreen2 sentences1990App. 5 Cir.1987) we discussed both the Terry stop and plain view doctrine: In discussing the ‘plain view’ doctrine in State v. Duperon, 448 So.2d 720, 723 (La.App. 5th Cir.1984), this court stated: The plain view doctrine is an exception to the search warrant requirement in that when there is no intrusion into a protected area, there is no ‘search’ for purposes of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. 1985The rule is set forth in State v. Duperon, 448 So.2d 720, 723 (La.App. 5th Cir.1984), as follows: “The plain view doctrine is an exception to the search warrant requirement in that when there is no intrusion into a protected' area, there is no ‘search’ for purposes of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. | 2 | 3 |
Schneckloth v. Bustamontegreen2 sentences2011Schneckloth v. Bustamante, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); State v. Strange, 04-0273, p. 6 (La.5/14/04), 876 So.2d 39, 42 . 2011Schneckloth v. Bustamante, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); State v. Strange, 04-0273, p. 6 (La.5/14/04), 876 So.2d 39, 42 . | 1 | 6 |
Ybarra v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences2013See, Ybarra, 444 U.S. at 92 , 100 S.Ct. at 342 (hold ing that the issuance of a search warrant for a bar and the bartender working there did not extend to the search/pat-down of a patron of the bar in the absence of any indication that the bar was frequented by drug users or that patrons were seen using drugs in the bar, or reasonable belief that the patron was involved in criminal activity or armed and dangerous). . 2013See, Ybarra, 444 U.S. at 92 , 100 S.Ct. at 342 (hold ing that the issuance of a search warrant for a bar and the bartender working there did not extend to the search/pat-down of a patron of the bar in the absence of any indication that the bar was frequented by drug users or that patrons were seen using drugs in the bar, or reasonable belief that the patron was involved in criminal activity or armed and dangerous). . | 1 | 3 |
State v. Browngreen2 sentences2012It is well established “[w]hen an officer inadvertently observes evidence of a crime from a vantage point that does not intrude upon a protected area or when that protected area is entered with prior justification, there is no violation of the search warrant rule because there has been no ‘search’....” State v. Brown, 370 So.2d 525 (La.1979). 1984The testimony of both officers established that their only purpose for approaching the premises was to further investigate the complaint of the unidentified citizen-informant who had advised them that she had seen the occupants of the camper "shooting up." The plain view rule is set forth in State v. Brown, 370 So.2d 525, 527 (La. 1979) as follows: "[w]hen an officer inadvertently observes evidence of a crime from a vantage point that does not intrude upon a protected area or when that protected area is entered with prior justification, there is no violation of the search warrant rule because | 1 | 3 |
Coolidge v. New Hampshiregreen2 sentences1993For a detailed description of the search warrant requirement and the "plain view" exception thereto, see State v. Neyrey, 383 So.2d 1222 (La.1979); State v. Huston, 445 So.2d 67 (La.App.2d Cir.1984); Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 , 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971). 1993For a detailed description of the search warrant requirement and the "plain view" exception thereto, see State v. Neyrey, 383 So.2d 1222 (La.1979); State v. Huston, 445 So.2d 67 (La.App.2d Cir.1984); Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 , 91 S.Ct. 2022 , 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Guidengreen2 sentences2008State v. Narcisse, 01-49 at 6, 791 So.2d at 153, citing State v. Guiden, 399 So.2d 194 (La.1981), cert denied, 454 U.S. 1150 , 102 S.Ct. 1017 , 71 L.Ed.2d 305 (1982). 2006State v. Guiden, 399 So.2d 194, 199 (La.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1150 , 102 S.Ct. 1017 , 71 L.Ed.2d 305 (1982). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Banksgreen2 sentences1990State v. Banks, 363 So.2d 491 (La.1978); State v. Junegain, 478 So.2d 542 (La.App. 4th Cir.1985). 1979See e. g., State v. Banks, 363 So.2d 491 (La.1978); State v. Schmidt, 359 So.2d 133 (La.1978); State v. Parker, 355 So.2d 900 (La.1978). *1189 The plain view rule is set forth in State v. Brown, 370 So.2d 525 (La. 1979), as follows: "When an officer inadvertently observes evidence of a crime from a vantage point that does not intrude upon a protected area or when that protected area is entered with prior justification, there is no violation of the search warrant rule because there has been no `search'...." Insofar as the seizure of the preludin and its paraphernalia is concerned, the officers | 1 | 2 |
| Birchfield v. N. Dakota. William Robert Bernardgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Martingreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Burnsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Lewisgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Chambers v. Maroney
green
2 sentences1992Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); State v. Chaney, 423 So.2d 1092 (La.1983); State v. Cohen, 549 So.2d 884 (La.App. 2d Cir.1989), writ denied, 559 So.2d 135 (La.1990). 1992Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); State v. Chaney, 423 So.2d 1092 (La.1983); State v. Cohen, 549 So.2d 884 (La.App. 2d Cir.1989), writ denied, 559 So.2d 135 (La.1990). | 5 | 1984–1992 |
United States v. Edwards
green
2 sentences2011State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985); State v. Burns, 44,937, p. 12 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2/2/10), 32 So.3d 261, 270 (citing LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 228; United States v. Edwards, 415 U.S. 800 , 94 S.Ct. 1234 , 39 L.Ed.2d 771 (1974); Wilson, supra; State v. Nuccio, 454 So.2d 93 (La.1984)). 2011State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985); State v. Burns, 44,937, p. 12 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2/2/10), 32 So.3d 261, 270 (citing LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 228; United States v. Edwards, 415 U.S. 800 , 94 S.Ct. 1234 , 39 L.Ed.2d 771 (1974); Wilson, supra; State v. Nuccio, 454 So.2d 93 (La.1984)). | 3 | 1984–2011 |
Sangemino v. United States
green
2 sentences2008State v. Narcisse, 01-49 at 6, 791 So.2d at 153, citing State v. Guiden, 399 So.2d 194 (La.1981), cert denied, 454 U.S. 1150 , 102 S.Ct. 1017 , 71 L.Ed.2d 305 (1982). 2006State v. Guiden, 399 So.2d 194, 199 (La.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1150 , 102 S.Ct. 1017 , 71 L.Ed.2d 305 (1982). | 3 | 2001–2008 |
Dickinson v. Pensacola Aeromotive Corp.
green
2 sentences2008State v. Narcisse, 01-49 at 6, 791 So.2d at 153, citing State v. Guiden, 399 So.2d 194 (La.1981), cert denied, 454 U.S. 1150 , 102 S.Ct. 1017 , 71 L.Ed.2d 305 (1982). 2006State v. Guiden, 399 So.2d 194, 199 (La.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1150 , 102 S.Ct. 1017 , 71 L.Ed.2d 305 (1982). | 3 | 2001–2008 |
Engelstad v. Swenson
green
2 sentences2008State v. Narcisse, 01-49 at 6, 791 So.2d at 153, citing State v. Guiden, 399 So.2d 194 (La.1981), cert denied, 454 U.S. 1150 , 102 S.Ct. 1017 , 71 L.Ed.2d 305 (1982). 2006State v. Guiden, 399 So.2d 194, 199 (La.1981), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1150 , 102 S.Ct. 1017 , 71 L.Ed.2d 305 (1982). | 3 | 2001–2008 |
Terry v. Ohio
green
2 sentences1995In Minnesota v. Dickerson, ___ U.S. ___, 113 S.Ct. 2130 , 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993), a cocaine possession case, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a limited "plain feel" exception to the search warrant requirement, holding that police may seize non-threatening contraband detected by touch during a protective *872 pat-down search so long as the search remains within the bounds marked by Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). 1995In Minnesota v. Dickerson, ___ U.S. ___, 113 S.Ct. 2130 , 124 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993), a cocaine possession case, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized a limited "plain feel" exception to the search warrant requirement, holding that police may seize non-threatening contraband detected by touch during a protective *872 pat-down search so long as the search remains within the bounds marked by Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 , 88 S.Ct. 1868 , 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968). | 3 | 1984–1995 |
State v. Jewell
green
2 sentences1986State v. Jewell, supra. The inventory search is a narrow exception to the requirement of a search warrant and the requirement of probable cause. 1983State v. Jewell, supra. The inventory search is a narrow exception to the requirement of a search warrant and the requirement of probable cause. | 3 | 1983–1986 |
State v. Parker
green
2 sentences1986State v. Bourg, 332 So.2d 235 (La.1976); State v. Thomas, 310 So.2d 517 (La.1975); State v. Terracina, 309 So.2d 271 (La.1975).” State v. Parker, supra. The fundamental question is whether there is an intrusion into an area in which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. 1979See e. g., State v. Banks, 363 So.2d 491 (La.1978); State v. Schmidt, 359 So.2d 133 (La.1978); State v. Parker, 355 So.2d 900 (La.1978). *1189 The plain view rule is set forth in State v. Brown, 370 So.2d 525 (La. 1979), as follows: "When an officer inadvertently observes evidence of a crime from a vantage point that does not intrude upon a protected area or when that protected area is entered with prior justification, there is no violation of the search warrant rule because there has been no `search'...." Insofar as the seizure of the preludin and its paraphernalia is concerned, the officers | 3 | 1979–1986 |
State v. Carter
green
2 sentences2019App. 5 Cir. 8/30/11), 75 So.3d 1 , writ denied, 11-2060 (La. 2/10/12), 80 So.3d 469 (holding defendant waived the argument that evidence should be suppressed because the search exceeded the scope of the search warrant when the defense counsel never asked the trial judge to rule on the “constitutionally overbroad” issue asserted for the first time on appeal); State v. Brown, 434 So.2d 399 (La. 1983) (rejecting defendant’s alternative argument regarding the denial of his motion to suppress because he had not raised the issue at trial); State v. Johnson, 07-1040 (La. 2013State v. Montejo, 06-1807, p. 22 (La.5/11/10), 40 So.3d 952, 967 , cert. denied, Montejo v. Louisiana, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 656 , 178 L.Ed.2d 513 (2010); See: LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 841(A) (“An irregularity or error cannot be availed of after verdict unless it was objected to at the time of occurrence.”); State v. Simmons, 422 So.2d 138 (La.1982); State v. Harris, 414 So.2d 325 (La.1982); State v. Davis, 357 So.2d 1125 (La.1978); See also: State v. Carter, 10-973, p. 7-8 (La.App. 5 Cir. 8/30/11), 75 So.3d 1 , writ denied, 2011-2060 (La.2/10/12), 80 So.3d 469 (holding defendant waived the argument tha | 2 | 2013–2019 |
State v. Brown
green
2 sentences2019App. 5 Cir. 8/30/11), 75 So.3d 1 , writ denied, 11-2060 (La. 2/10/12), 80 So.3d 469 (holding defendant waived the argument that evidence should be suppressed because the search exceeded the scope of the search warrant when the defense counsel never asked the trial judge to rule on the “constitutionally overbroad” issue asserted for the first time on appeal); State v. Brown, 434 So.2d 399 (La. 1983) (rejecting defendant’s alternative argument regarding the denial of his motion to suppress because he had not raised the issue at trial); State v. Johnson, 07-1040 (La. 2013State v. Montejo, 06-1807, p. 22 (La.5/11/10), 40 So.3d 952, 967 , cert. denied, Montejo v. Louisiana, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 656 , 178 L.Ed.2d 513 (2010); See: LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 841(A) (“An irregularity or error cannot be availed of after verdict unless it was objected to at the time of occurrence.”); State v. Simmons, 422 So.2d 138 (La.1982); State v. Harris, 414 So.2d 325 (La.1982); State v. Davis, 357 So.2d 1125 (La.1978); See also: State v. Carter, 10-973, p. 7-8 (La.App. 5 Cir. 8/30/11), 75 So.3d 1 , writ denied, 2011-2060 (La.2/10/12), 80 So.3d 469 (holding defendant waived the argument tha | 2 | 2013–2019 |
State v. Johnson
green
2 sentences2019App. 4 Cir. 9/10/08), 993 So.2d 326, 330-31 , writ denied, 08-2649 (La. 6/5/09), 9 So.3d 868 (“failure to raise a ground for suppressing an item of evidence in a properly filed motion to suppress waives such a basis for exclusion on appeal”); State v. Jackson, 04-1388 (La. 2013State v. Montejo, 06-1807, p. 22 (La.5/11/10), 40 So.3d 952, 967 , cert. denied, Montejo v. Louisiana, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 656 , 178 L.Ed.2d 513 (2010); See: LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 841(A) (“An irregularity or error cannot be availed of after verdict unless it was objected to at the time of occurrence.”); State v. Simmons, 422 So.2d 138 (La.1982); State v. Harris, 414 So.2d 325 (La.1982); State v. Davis, 357 So.2d 1125 (La.1978); See also: State v. Carter, 10-973, p. 7-8 (La.App. 5 Cir. 8/30/11), 75 So.3d 1 , writ denied, 2011-2060 (La.2/10/12), 80 So.3d 469 (holding defendant waived the argument tha | 2 | 2013–2019 |
State v. McGee
green
2 sentences2019App. 4 Cir. 9/10/08), 993 So.2d 326, 330-31 , writ denied, 08-2649 (La. 6/5/09), 9 So.3d 868 (“failure to raise a ground for suppressing an item of evidence in a properly filed motion to suppress waives such a basis for exclusion on appeal”); State v. Jackson, 04-1388 (La. 2013State v. Montejo, 06-1807, p. 22 (La.5/11/10), 40 So.3d 952, 967 , cert. denied, Montejo v. Louisiana, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 656 , 178 L.Ed.2d 513 (2010); See: LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 841(A) (“An irregularity or error cannot be availed of after verdict unless it was objected to at the time of occurrence.”); State v. Simmons, 422 So.2d 138 (La.1982); State v. Harris, 414 So.2d 325 (La.1982); State v. Davis, 357 So.2d 1125 (La.1978); See also: State v. Carter, 10-973, p. 7-8 (La.App. 5 Cir. 8/30/11), 75 So.3d 1 , writ denied, 2011-2060 (La.2/10/12), 80 So.3d 469 (holding defendant waived the argument tha | 2 | 2013–2019 |
State v. Carter
green
2 sentences2019App. 5 Cir. 8/30/11), 75 So.3d 1 , writ denied, 11-2060 (La. 2/10/12), 80 So.3d 469 (holding defendant waived the argument that evidence should be suppressed because the search exceeded the scope of the search warrant when the defense counsel never asked the trial judge to rule on the “constitutionally overbroad” issue asserted for the first time on appeal); State v. Brown, 434 So.2d 399 (La. 1983) (rejecting defendant’s alternative argument regarding the denial of his motion to suppress because he had not raised the issue at trial); State v. Johnson, 07-1040 (La. 2013State v. Montejo, 06-1807, p. 22 (La.5/11/10), 40 So.3d 952, 967 , cert. denied, Montejo v. Louisiana, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 656 , 178 L.Ed.2d 513 (2010); See: LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 841(A) (“An irregularity or error cannot be availed of after verdict unless it was objected to at the time of occurrence.”); State v. Simmons, 422 So.2d 138 (La.1982); State v. Harris, 414 So.2d 325 (La.1982); State v. Davis, 357 So.2d 1125 (La.1978); See also: State v. Carter, 10-973, p. 7-8 (La.App. 5 Cir. 8/30/11), 75 So.3d 1 , writ denied, 2011-2060 (La.2/10/12), 80 So.3d 469 (holding defendant waived the argument tha | 2 | 2013–2019 |
State v. Nuccio
green
2 sentences2011State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985); State v. Burns, 44,937, p. 12 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2/2/10), 32 So.3d 261, 270 (citing LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 228; United States v. Edwards, 415 U.S. 800 , 94 S.Ct. 1234 , 39 L.Ed.2d 771 (1974); Wilson, supra; State v. Nuccio, 454 So.2d 93 (La.1984)). 2010LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 228; United States v. Edwards, 415 U.S. 800 , 94 S.Ct. 1234 , 39 L.Ed.2d 771 (1974); State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503 (La.1985); State v. Nuccio, 454 So.2d 93 (La.1984). | 2 | 2010–2011 |
State v. Strange
green
2 sentences2011Schneckloth v. Bustamante, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); State v. Strange, 04-0273, p. 6 (La.5/14/04), 876 So.2d 39, 42 . 2010Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); State v. Strange, 04-0273, p. 6 (La.5/14/04), 876 So.2d 39, 42 . | 2 | 2010–2011 |
Saville v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.
green
2 sentences2011State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985); State v. Burns, 44,937, p. 12 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2/2/10), 32 So.3d 261, 270 (citing LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 228; United States v. Edwards, 415 U.S. 800 , 94 S.Ct. 1234 , 39 L.Ed.2d 771 (1974); Wilson, supra; State v. Nuccio, 454 So.2d 93 (La.1984)). 2006In State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985), this court held "the right of the police to conduct a personal effects inventory search at the time of an arrested person's booking is a recognized exception to the search warrant requirement." This right to seize items after lawful arrest and during booking is not completely unfettered, as the item seized must be contraband, an instrumentality of the crime, a fruit of the crime, or evidence of a crime. | 2 | 2006–2011 |
In re Tracey
green
2 sentences2011State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985); State v. Burns, 44,937, p. 12 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2/2/10), 32 So.3d 261, 270 (citing LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 228; United States v. Edwards, 415 U.S. 800 , 94 S.Ct. 1234 , 39 L.Ed.2d 771 (1974); Wilson, supra; State v. Nuccio, 454 So.2d 93 (La.1984)). 2006In State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985), this court held "the right of the police to conduct a personal effects inventory search at the time of an arrested person's booking is a recognized exception to the search warrant requirement." This right to seize items after lawful arrest and during booking is not completely unfettered, as the item seized must be contraband, an instrumentality of the crime, a fruit of the crime, or evidence of a crime. | 2 | 2006–2011 |
State v. Roof
green
2 sentences2011State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985); State v. Burns, 44,937, p. 12 (La.App. 2 Cir. 2/2/10), 32 So.3d 261, 270 (citing LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 228; United States v. Edwards, 415 U.S. 800 , 94 S.Ct. 1234 , 39 L.Ed.2d 771 (1974); Wilson, supra; State v. Nuccio, 454 So.2d 93 (La.1984)). 2006In State v. Wilson, 467 So.2d 503, 517 (La.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 911 , 106 S.Ct. 281 , 88 L.Ed.2d 246 (1985), this court held "the right of the police to conduct a personal effects inventory search at the time of an arrested person's booking is a recognized exception to the search warrant requirement." This right to seize items after lawful arrest and during booking is not completely unfettered, as the item seized must be contraband, an instrumentality of the crime, a fruit of the crime, or evidence of a crime. | 2 | 2006–2011 |
State v. Chaney
green
2 sentences1992Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); State v. Chaney, 423 So.2d 1092 (La.1983); State v. Cohen, 549 So.2d 884 (La.App. 2d Cir.1989), writ denied, 559 So.2d 135 (La.1990). 1991Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); State v. Chaney, 423 So.2d 1092 (La.1983); State v. Cohen, 549 So.2d 884 (La.App. 2d Cir.1989), writ denied 559 So.2d 135 (La.1990). | 2 | 1991–1992 |
State v. Ketchens
neutral
2 sentences1992Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); State v. Chaney, 423 So.2d 1092 (La.1983); State v. Cohen, 549 So.2d 884 (La.App. 2d Cir.1989), writ denied, 559 So.2d 135 (La.1990). 1991Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); State v. Chaney, 423 So.2d 1092 (La.1983); State v. Cohen, 549 So.2d 884 (La.App. 2d Cir.1989), writ denied 559 So.2d 135 (La.1990). | 2 | 1991–1992 |
State v. Cohen
green
2 sentences1992Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); State v. Chaney, 423 So.2d 1092 (La.1983); State v. Cohen, 549 So.2d 884 (La.App. 2d Cir.1989), writ denied, 559 So.2d 135 (La.1990). 1991Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970); State v. Chaney, 423 So.2d 1092 (La.1983); State v. Cohen, 549 So.2d 884 (La.App. 2d Cir.1989), writ denied 559 So.2d 135 (La.1990). | 2 | 1991–1992 |
State v. Terracina
green
2 sentences1986State v. Bourg, 332 So.2d 235 (La.1976); State v. Thomas, 310 So.2d 517 (La.1975); State v. Terracina, 309 So.2d 271 (La.1975).” State v. Parker, supra. The fundamental question is whether there is an intrusion into an area in which there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. 1978When an officer inadvertently observes evidence of a crime from a vantage point that does not intrude upon a protected area or when that protected area is entered with prior justification, there is no violation of the search warrant rule because there has been no "search." See also State v. Bourg, 332 So.2d 235 (La.1976); State v. Thomas, 310 So.2d 517 (La.1975); State v. Terracina, 309 So.2d 271 (La.1975). | 2 | 1978–1986 |
| State v. Thomas green | 2 | 1978–1986 |
| State v. Bourg green | 2 | 1978–1986 |
| State v. Ludwig green | 2 | 1984–1984 |
| State v. Montejo green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| State v. Davis green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| State v. Jackson green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| State v. Simmons green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| Hall v. Ward green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| Johnson v. Johnson green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| State v. Harris green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| State v. Jackson green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| Nix v. Williams green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| State v. Hathaway green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| State v. Franklin green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| State v. Bradford green | 1 | 1999–1999 |
| Minnesota v. Dickerson green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| State v. Neyrey green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| State v. Huston green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
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.