Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Leger, 936 So. 2d 108.

375 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Aaron Francois La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Francois 114 So. 3d 678 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Freddie Lynn Lassien La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Leger, 05-11 (La.7/10/06), (citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct.
State of Louisiana v. Patrick Paul George La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
2301, 2307, 110 L.Ed.2d 112 (1990); State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 65 (La.7/10/06), cert.
State v. Brown 115 So. 3d 564 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
See State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 44 (La.7/10/06), .
State of Louisiana v. James R Francis La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State of Louisiana v. Ernest Joseph Arceneaux La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
uilty of simple burglary of an automobile.1 The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), cert.
State v. Francis 111 So. 3d 529 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
‘that would deprive the average person of self-control and cool reflection.’ ” The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Arceneaux 111 So. 3d 1177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
1 The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Buhcannon 112 So. 3d 312 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
2243, 2254 , 58 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977); State v. Leger, 2005-0011, p. 59 (La.7/10/06), .
State of Louisiana v. Brian Segura La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Segura 129 So. 3d 76 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
*80 1989) and State v. Leger, 05-11 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Willis J. Mouton AKA Willis James Mouton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), cert.
State v. Mouton 129 So. 3d 49 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), cert.
State of Louisiana v. Stanley Charles Young, III La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is ―whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.‖ State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), cert.
State of Louisiana v. James Lee Burks, III La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
ourt stated: It is well settled that the standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is ―whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.‖ State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), cert.
State of Louisiana v. Anthony Wayne Dennis, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013
State v. Dennis 107 So. 3d 867 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
|fiThe standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Elzy 109 So. 3d 57 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2013
State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 53 (La.7/10/06), -48 , c ert.
State of Louisiana v. Cleveland Troy Bias La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Garcia 108 So. 3d 1 La. 2012
See, e.g., State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), (death sentence rested on, inter alia, jury’s finding defendant killed the victim during the course of an aggravated kidnapping or second-degree kidnapping); State v. Ball, 00-2277 (La.1/25/02), (patron robbed bar and killed -beer delivery man in the course); State v. Anthony, 98-0406 (La.4/11/00), 776
State of Louisiana v. Dexter Holder La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State of Louisiana v. Jeremiah R. Teno La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State of Louisiana v. Brent Ervin Prudhomme La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
7/10/06), (citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct.
State v. Teno 101 So. 3d 1068 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Holder 101 So. 3d 1059 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is | ./‘whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Prudhomme 101 So. 3d 565 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Leger, 05-11 (La.7/10/06), (citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 , 99 S.Ct.
State v. Letell 103 So. 3d 1129 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Leger, 2005-0011 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Jonathan L.citizen La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State of Louisiana v. D. R. M. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State of Louisiana v. Marqule Craft La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
1602 (1966)] ―protects an individual‘s Fifth Amendment privilege during incommunicado interrogation in a police-controlled atmosphere.‖ State v. Leger, 05–0011, p. 13 (La.7/10/06), citing State v. Taylor, 01–1638, p. 6 (La.1/14/03)
State v. Craft 99 So. 3d 1108 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966) ] “protects an individual’s Fifth Amendment privilege during incommunicado interrogation in a police-controlled atmosphere.” State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 13 (La.7/10/06), , citing State v. Taylor, 01-1638, p. 6 (La.1/14/03), .
State v. Bone 107 So. 3d 49 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), .
State v. Kirk 98 So. 3d 934 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Campbell, 06-0286, p. 73 (La.5/21/08), ; State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 66 (La.7/10/06), .
State v. Cyrus 97 So. 3d 554 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
2243, 2254 , 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977); State v. Leger, 2005-0011, p. 59 (La.7/10/06), .
State v. Everett 96 So. 3d 605 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 92 (La.7/10/06)
State of Louisiana v. Chad Tyrone Williams La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Burton 98 So. 3d 375 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), , cert, denied, 549 U.S. 1221 , 127 S.Ct.
State v. Cortez 98 So. 3d 382 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
“Under the plain view doctrine, if police are lawfully in a position |17from which they view an object that has an incriminating nature that is immediately apparent, and if the officers have a lawful right to access to the object, they may seize it without a warrant.” State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 65 (La.7/10/06), , cert, denied, 549 U.S. 1221 , 127 S.Ct.
State of Louisiana v. Ordesto Marando Toussaint La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State of Louisiana v. Larry Joseph McKithern La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. McKithern 93 So. 3d 684 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Toussaint 94 So. 3d 62 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 53 (La.7/10/06), -48 , cert, denied, 549 U.S. 1221 , 127 S.Ct.
State v. Abdul 94 So. 3d 801 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 43 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Jason L. Walton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Walton 87 So. 3d 328 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Smith 90 So. 3d 1114 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 10 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Terry L. Clarkson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State of Louisiana v. Bryce Perkins La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
2d Cir.8/15/07), citing State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), cert.
State v. Clarkson 86 So. 3d 804 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
*813 The standard of review in a sufficiency of the evidence claim is “whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found proof beyond a reasonable doubt of each of the essential elements of the crime charged.” State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), , cert.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by