La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 14:24 (2026)

Principals

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§24.  Principals

All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether present or absent, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, aid and abet in its commission, or directly or indirectly counsel or procure another to commit the crime, are principals.  

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 730 cases (24 in the last 5 years), 1951–2026 · leading case: State v. McAllister, 366 So. 2d 1340 (La. 1978).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. McAllister, 366 So. 2d 1340 (La. 1978). · cites it 8× “See Reporter's Comment to R.S. 14:24; LaFave and Scott, Criminal Law, § 63, at 500 (Hornbook ed.”
State of Louisiana v. Chadwick McGhee, 223 So. 3d 1136 (La. 2017). · cites it 4× “R.S. 14:24. The court of appeal found the evidence insufficient to show that the defendant, who was present at a kidnapping, was aware that a kidnapping was going to occur or had any intent to aid and abet in the commission of the crime.”
State v. Garcia, 108 So. 3d 1 (La. 2012). · cites it 4× “” La.Rev.Stat. § 14:24. By participating in the armed robbery, sexual assault, and homicide, defendant was a principal to Davies’s first-degree murder, regardless of which of her attackers inflicted the fatal wounds.”
State v. Gilliam, 827 So. 2d 508 (La. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “R.S. 14:24 provides: All persons concerned in the commission of a crime, whether present or absent, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, aid and abet in its commission, or directly or indirectly counsel or procure another to commit the crime, are…”
State v. Allen, 828 So. 2d 622 (La. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “R.S. 14:24. Only those persons who knowingly participate in the planning or execution of a crime are principals.”
State v. Martin, 539 So. 2d 1235 (La. 1989). · cites it 4× “R.S. 14:24 (emphasis *1238 added). [5] The statute imposes no independent intent requirement.”
State v. Holmes, 388 So. 2d 722 (La. 1980). · cites it 3× “R.S. 14:24, by means of hypothetical situations.”
State v. Bridgewater, 823 So. 2d 877 (La. 2002). · cites it 2× “R.S. 14:24. [15] To prevail on its principal theory, the state had the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant harbored specific intent to kill the victims, not merely that defendant knew of Jacobs' intent to do so.”
State v. Dyson, 222 So. 3d 220 (La. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “R.S. 14:24. Mere presence at the scene of a crime does not make one a principal to the crime.”
State v. Smith, 839 So. 2d 1 (La. 2003). “R.S. 14:24. The defendant showed no remorse.”
State v. Holmes, 5 So. 3d 42 (La. 2008). · cites it 2× “R.S. 14:24. The remarks otherwise constitute mere argument of counsel, their understanding of what the facts showed, and thus, not evidence and not admissions of fact within the personal knowledge of a party opponent and that party's representatives for purposes of La.”
State v. Brown, 904 So. 2d 805 (La. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 7× “R.S. 14:24, the law of principals, be resolved in his favor.”
Show all 730 citing cases →
— La. Rev. Stat. § 14:24(1950) — 1 case
State v. Bradley, 310 So. 2d 582 (La. 1975).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.