Supreme Court of Louisiana· 12/2/2008
State v. Holmes
Citations
- 5 So. 3d 42
- 2008 La. LEXIS 2758
- 2008 WL 5158222
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that \Louisiana law clearly establishes that a party interviewing a prospective juror may not ask a question or pose a hypothetical scenario which would demand a commitment or pre-judgment from the juror\
- “This Court has observed that Louisiana juries appear especially prone to impose capital punishment for crimes committed in the home.”
- State’s emphasis on each offender’s culpability at their respective trials constituted neither inconsistent nor mutually exclusive theories of the crime
- ―[A] new basis for an objection may not be urged for the first time on appeal[.]‖
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Knoll, Calogero, Johnson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
58 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. DorseySupreme Court of Louisiana· 2011-09-07· cited 160×
- State v. JacobsLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2011-05-24· cited 93×
- State v. OdenbaughSupreme Court of Louisiana· 2011-12-06· cited 84×
- State of Louisiana v. Eric Dale MickelsonSupreme Court of Louisiana· 2014-09-03· cited 74×
- State of Louisiana v. Marcus Donte ReedSupreme Court of Louisiana· 2016-09-07· cited 46×
- State of Louisiana v. Robert Glen ColemanSupreme Court of Louisiana· 2016-02-26· cited 45×
- State v. NixonLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2017-05-19· cited 44×
- State v. RubensLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2011-11-30· cited 41×
- State v. HortonLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2009-10-27· cited 39×
- State v. DressnerSupreme Court of Louisiana· 2010-07-06· cited 35×
- State v. McElveenLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2011-09-28· cited 33×
- State of Louisiana v. Jeffrey ClarkSupreme Court of Louisiana· 2016-12-19· cited 27×
- State v. BarbainLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2015-11-04· cited 25×
- State v. BellSupreme Court of Louisiana· 2010-11-30· cited 24×
- State v. WatkinsLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2014-08-06· cited 20×
- State of Louisiana v. Robert Leroy McCoySupreme Court of Louisiana· 2016-10-19· cited 19×
- State of Louisiana v. Lee Turner, Jr.Supreme Court of Louisiana· 2018-12-05· cited 17×
- State v. HanktonLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2014-04-30· cited 14×
- State v. FarrisLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2016-12-14· cited 14×
- State v. TaylorLouisiana Court of Appeal· 2015-01-14· cited 13×
Cites
162 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 123,578×
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1966-06-13· cited 58,288×
- Witherspoon v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1968-06-03· cited 4,818×
- Wainwright v. WittSupreme Court· 1985-01-21· cited 3,997×
- Roper v. SimmonsSupreme Court· 2005-03-01· cited 3,523×
- Sullivan v. LouisianaSupreme Court· 1993-06-01· cited 3,512×
- Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court· 1991-09-13· cited 3,458×
- Atkins v. VirginiaSupreme Court· 2002-06-20· cited 3,384×
- Drope v. MissouriSupreme Court· 1975-02-19· cited 2,695×
- Crane v. KentuckySupreme Court· 1986-06-09· cited 2,651×
- Pulley v. HarrisSupreme Court· 1984-01-23· cited 2,080×
- Michelson v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1949-02-14· cited 1,808×
- Frazier v. CuppSupreme Court· 1969-04-23· cited 1,468×
- Medina v. CaliforniaSupreme Court· 1992-06-22· cited 1,180×
- Patterson v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1988-06-24· cited 1,013×
- State v. PrieurSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1973-03-29· cited 910×
- Bottoson v. FloridaSupreme Court· 1984-10-01· cited 793×
- David W. McKay v. TexasSupreme Court· 1986-10-06· cited 757×
- Gray v. MississippiSupreme Court· 1987-05-18· cited 634×
- Bradshaw v. StumpfSupreme Court· 2005-06-13· cited 540×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.