DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Brown, 907 So. 2d 1.

222 citing documents.

  • State ex rel. J.W. 157 So. 3d 764 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    4 Cir. 7/5/12), (quoting State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), ).
  • State v. Spencer 151 So. 3d 816 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    See also State v. Brown, 03-0897 (La.4/12/05), ; State v. Veal, 12-0712 (La.App.
  • State v. Austin 146 So. 3d 716 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2014
    Preston , supra, citing State v. Robinson, 11-1017 (La.App.5th Cir.5/31/12), , writ denied, 12-1432 (La.1/11/13), ; Freeman, supra, citing State v. Brown, 03-0897 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Cushenberry 146 So. 3d 777 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    See also State v. Broion, 03-0897 (La.4/12/05), ; State v. Veal, 12-0712 (La.App.
  • State ex rel. K.D. 140 So. 3d 182 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Stanfield 137 So. 3d 788 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    at p. 24, 68 So.3d at 1019 , citing State v. Brown, 03-0897, pp. 28-31 (La.4/12/05), -24 ().
  • State ex rel. A.W. 137 So. 3d 728 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Simmons 136 So. 3d 358 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    See also, State v. Brown, 03-897 (La.4/12/05), , cert.
  • State v. Coleman 133 So. 3d 9 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Martin 131 So. 3d 121 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    2 In State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), , the Court set forth the standard for examining a claim of insufficiency of evidence: When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, Louisiana appellate courts are controlled by the standard enunciated in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct.
  • State v. Edgar 140 So. 3d 22 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    In State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), , the Court set forth the standard for determining a claim of insufficiency of evidence: When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, Louisiana appellate courts are controlled by the standard enunciated in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct.
  • State v. Fields 120 So. 3d 309 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), (determine whether the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient to convince a rational trier of fact that all of the elements of the crime had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt).
  • State v. Veal 116 So. 3d 779 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    See also State v. Brown, 2003-0897 11s(La.4/12/05), ; State v. Batiste, 2006-0875 (La.App.
  • State v. Ross 115 So. 3d 616 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), which requires the court to determine whether the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, “was sufficient to convince a rational trier of fact that all of the elements of the crime had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.” see also State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 18 (La.4/12/05), ; State v. Batiste, 06-0875, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Buhcannon 112 So. 3d 312 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    See State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Brown 109 So. 3d 966 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    See State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Hayes 108 So. 3d 360 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    In State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), , the Court set forth the standard for determining a claim of insufficiency of evidence: When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, Louisiana appellate courts are controlled by the standard enunciated in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct.
  • State v. Ellis 109 So. 3d 944 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Elzy 109 So. 3d 57 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
    5 Cir. 6/19/08), , writ denied, 08-1660 (La.4/3/09), (citing State v. Brown, 03-897 (La.4/12/05), , cert.
  • State v. Pleasant 102 So. 3d 247 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    See also State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), ; State v. Batiste, 06-0875, p. 7 (La.App.
  • State v. Barnes 100 So. 3d 926 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    It may be “inferred from the defendant’s actions and the circumstances of the transaction.” State v. Brown, 2003-897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Armstead 98 So. 3d 891 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    15:438 requires that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.’ Ultimately, all evidence, both direct and circumstantial must be sufficient under Jackson 3 to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to a rational jury.” State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Guity 97 So. 3d 1113 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    The Louisiana Supreme Court set forth the standard for evaluating a claim of insufficient evidence in State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), , 18: *1118 When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, Louisiana appellate courts are controlled by the standard enunciated in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct.
  • State v. Ennis 97 So. 3d 575 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    In State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), , the Court set forth the standard for determining a claim of insufficiency of evidence: When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, Louisiana appellate courts are controlled by the standard enunciated in Jackson v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct.
  • State ex rel. J.W. 95 So. 3d 1187 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State ex rel. A.D. 95 So. 3d 1176 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State ex rel. J.W. 95 So. 3d 1181 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Hardy 92 So. 3d 1090 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
    15:451; State v. Brown, 2003-0897 (La.4/12/05), ; State v. Wilson, 40,767 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Ordesto Marando Toussaint La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
  • State v. Williams 85 So. 3d 759 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    *770 See also State v. Brown, 2003-0897 (La.4/12/05), ; State v. Batiste, 2006-0875 (La.App.
  • State v. Fontenot 87 So. 3d 154 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    See State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), (“Specific intent need not be proven as a fact, but may be inferred from the defendant’s actions and the circumstances of the transaction.”).
  • State v. McCord 85 So. 3d 210 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    |In State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth the standard of review for a claim of insufficiency of evidence, as follows: When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, Louisiana appellate courts are controlled by the standard enunciated in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct.
  • State in Interest of La 85 So. 3d 192 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
    State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Carter 84 So. 3d 499 La. 2012
    Similarly, “ ‘[w]hile an indigent defendant has a right to counsel as well as the opposite right to represent himself, he has no constitutional right to be both represented and representative.’ ” State v. Brown, 03-0897, pp. 28-31 (La.4/12/05), -24 (quoting Bodley, 394 So.2d at 593 ).
  • State v. Jones 81 So. 3d 236 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897 (La.4/12/05), ; State v. Harrison, supra.
  • State v. Robinson 81 So. 3d 90 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    See State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Richards 78 So. 3d 864 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    In State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth the following standard for reviewing a claim of insufficiency of evidence: When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, Louisiana appellate courts are controlled by the standard enunciated in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct.
  • State of Louisiana v. Rickey D. Arvie La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
    State v. Brown, 03-897 (La.4/12/05), (citing Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 95 S.Ct.
  • State of Louisiana v. Kerry Jerrod Sanders La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
  • State v. Arvie 73 So. 3d 516 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    State v. Brown, 03-897 (La.4/12/05), (citing Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct.
  • State v. Sanders 74 So. 3d 284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    14:10(1) defines the term as “that state of mind which exists when the circumstances indicate that the offender actively desired the prescribed criminal consequences to follow his act or failure to act.” In State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), , cert.
  • State v. Joseph 71 So. 3d 549 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    In State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), , the Court set forth the standard for determining a claim of insufficiency of evidence: When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, Louisiana appellate courts are controlled by the standard enunciated in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct.
  • State v. Mathieu 68 So. 3d 1015 La. 2011
    As a general rule, one to which this Court has long subscribed, an indigent defendant “ ‘has a right to counsel as well as the opposite right to represent himself, [but] he has no constitutional right to be both represented and representative.’ ” State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 29 (La.4/12/05), (); see also Bell, 09-0199 at 17, n. 14, 53 So.3d at 448 (“A defendant who is represented by counsel has no Sixth Amendment right to participate as co-counsel.
  • State ex rel. C.D. 69 So. 3d 1219 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2011
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State ex rel. C.N. 69 So. 3d 711 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2011
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 18 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State Ex Rel. Cn 69 So. 3d 711 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2011
    State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 18 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Green 69 So. 3d 695 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    State v. Brown,, 2003-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State v. Adams 68 So. 3d 1165 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); see also, e.g., State v. Brown, 03-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/05), .
  • State ex rel. L.V. 66 So. 3d 558 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Brown, 2003-0897, p. 22 (La.4/12/2005), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Alex P. Papillion La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011