Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Marshall, 943 So. 2d 362.

146 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Marcus Donte Reed 200 So. 3d 291 La. 2016
State v. Scott 197 So. 3d 298 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
“Absent internal contradiction or irreconcilable conflict with the physical evidence, a single witness’s testimony, if believed by the fact finder, is sufficient to support a factual conclusion.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State of Louisiana v. Ashaki Okung Kelly 195 So. 3d 449 La. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Odeal Pippins Lirette La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
State v. Lirette 195 So. 3d 644 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
“Credibility determinations are within the sound discretion of the trier of fact and will not be disturbed unless clearly contrary to the evidence.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), , cert.
State v. Jackson 193 So. 3d 425 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
4 Cir. 2/18/15).; (citing State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), ,- 369).
State v. Hickman 194 So. 3d 1160 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State of Louisiana v. Mark Wayne Thibodeaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
State v. Thibodeaux 190 So. 3d 426 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
“Credibility determinations are within the sound discretion of the trier of fact and will not be disturbed unless clearly contrary to the evidence.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Eric Johnson aka/eric Dwayne Johnson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
State v. Johnson 186 So. 3d 348 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
“Credibility determinations are within the sound discretion of the trier of fact and will not be disturbed unless clearly contrary to the evidence.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), , cert.
State v. Johnson 187 So. 3d 35 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
See State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), ().
State v. Gibson 186 So. 3d 772 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p, 6 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. Rainey 189 So. 3d 439 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
“Absent internal contradiction or irreconcilable conflict with the physical evidence, a single witness’s testimony, if believed by the fact finder, is sufficient to support a factual conclusion.” State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. Lambert 186 So. 3d 728 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Marshall, 04—3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), ; State v. Robinson, 10-0885, pp. 7-8 (La.App.
State v. Pratt 184 So. 3d 816 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
In Stat e v. Marshall, 2004-3139 (La.11/29/06), , cert.
State v. Barbain 179 So. 3d 770 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 2/18/16), (citing State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), ).
State v. White 174 So. 3d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 3/30/11), ; State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 8 (La.11/29/06)
State v. Campbell 171 So. 3d 1176 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
4 Cir. 2/18/15), (citing State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), ).
State v. Jackson 163 So. 3d 98 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
Under this standard, a reviewing court may “impinge on the actual fact finder’s discretion only to the extent necessary to guarantee the fundamental protection of due process of law.’ ” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 5 (La.11/29/06), (quoting Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct.
State v. Casaday 162 So. 3d 578 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2015
State v. Marshall, 04-3139 (La.11/29/06), , citing, State v. Legrand, 02-1462 (La.12/3/03), .
State v. Miller 160 So. 3d 1069 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
See also State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06); (“Absent internal contradiction or irreconcilable conflict with the physical evidence, a single witness’s testimony, if believed by the fact finder, is sufficient to support a factual conclusion.”); State v. Robinson, 10-0885, pp. 7-8 (La.App.
State v. Rapp 161 So. 3d 103 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. Armstead 159 So. 3d 502 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
See also State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06); (“Absent internal contradiction or irreconcilable conflict with the physical evidence, a single witness’s testimony, if believed by the fact finder, is sufficient to support a factual conclusion.”); State v. Robinson, *513 10-0885, pp. 7-8 (La.App.
State v. Bowens 156 So. 3d 770 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. Ramirez 154 So. 3d 636 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
4 Cir. 9/28/11), (citing State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), ); State v. Allen, 2003-2156, p. 8 (La.App.
State of Louisiana v. Ronald Pete La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2014
“Credibility determinations are within the sound discretion of the trier of fact and will not be disturbed unless clearly contrary to the evidence.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), cert.
State v. Pete 134 So. 3d 196 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
“Credibility determinations are within the sound discretion of the trier of fact and will not be disturbed unless clearly contrary to the evidence.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), , cert, denied, 552 U.S. 905 , 128 S.Ct.
State v. Deweese 128 So. 3d 1186 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
The State argues a trial court’s articulation of its thought processes in returning a verdict is irrelevant and a reviewing court is to perform an objective evaluation of the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution in accordance with State v. Marshall, 04-3139 (La.11/29/06), , cert.
State v. Quinn 123 So. 3d 320 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
“Absent internal contradiction or irreconcilable conflict with the physical evidence, a single witness’s testimony, if believed by the fact finder, is sufficient to support a *327 factual conclusion.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. Dunn 119 So. 3d 910 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. Galle 107 So. 3d 916 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
Davis v. Recreation Department 107 So. 3d 1254 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), ().
State v. Davis 147 So. 3d 712 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. Sanchell 103 So. 3d 677 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
“Absent internal contradiction or irreconcilable conflict with the physical evidence, a single witness’s testimony, if believed by the fact finder, is sufficient to support a factual conclusion.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), ; see also State v. Robinson, 10-0885, pp. 7-8 (La.App.
State v. Guity 97 So. 3d 1113 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. Williams 97 So. 3d 428 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State of Louisiana v. S. R. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State of Louisiana v. K.W. T. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Pittman 85 So. 3d 782 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State of Louisiana v. Carlos Rios Cortes La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Cortes 84 So. 3d 733 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
“Credibility determinations are within the sound discretion of the trier of fact and will not be disturbed unless clearly contrary to the evidence.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), , cert.
State v. Ott 80 So. 3d 1280 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
Therefore, “absent internal contradiction or irreconcilable conflict with the physical evidence, a single witness’s testimony, if believed by the fact finder, is sufficient to support a factual conclusion.” State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), ( (La.
State v. Jones 76 So. 3d 608 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139 (La.11/29/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. F. F. Q. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. FFQ 73 So. 3d 536 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), , cert.
State v. F.F.Q. 73 So. 3d 536 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
“Credibility determinations are within the sound discretion of the trier of fact and will not be disturbed unless clearly contrary to the evidence.” State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Shawn Shelton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. McElveen 73 So. 3d 1033 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Marshall, 04-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), .
State v. White 74 So. 3d 748 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Marshall, 2004-3139, p. 9 (La.11/29/06), (citation omitted).