Cited by

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

375 citing documents.

State v. Perkins 85 So. 3d 810 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
State v. Baker, 41,555 (La.App.2d Cir.8/15/07), , citing State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Bradham 87 So. 3d 200 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2012
Id.; State v. Leger, 2005-0011 (La.07/10/06), , cert.
State v. Gorman 88 So. 3d 590 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2012
See State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Michael D. Patterson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2012
State v. Patterson 83 So. 3d 1209 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 of Louisiana v. Michael Bushnell Sr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Leger, 2005-0011 (La.7/10/06), State v. Deal, 2000-0434 (La.11/28/01), cert.
State v. Odenbaugh 82 So. 3d 215 La. 2011
See State v. Holmes, 06-2988 (La.12/2/08), ; State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), ; State v. Blank, 04-0204 (La.4/11/07), ; State v. Howard, 98-0064 (La.4/23/99), ; State v. Gradley, 97-0641 (La.5/19/98), ; State v. Robertson, 97-0177 (La.3/4/98), ; State v. Perr
State v. Leonard 80 So. 3d 535 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
“Under the plain view doctrine, if police are lawfully in a position from 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.
State v. Anderson 78 So. 3d 176 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Leger, 2005-0011 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Kerry Jerrod Sanders La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Sanders 74 So. 3d 284 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), .
State v. LeBlanc 76 So. 3d 572 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
|2SIn State v. Leger, 2005-0011, p. 43 (La.7/10/06), , the Louisiana Supreme Court commented on the right to counsel, stating: La.
State of Louisiana v. Shawn Shelton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Green 84 So. 3d 573 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
2243, 2254 , 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977); State v. Leger, 2005-0011, p. 59 (La.7/10/06), , quoting Manson .
State v. Shelton 75 So. 3d 512 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
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. Russell 73 So. 3d 991 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Leger, 2005-0011 (La.7/10/06), ; State v. Robinson, 45,820 (La.App.
State v. Parker 71 So. 3d 383 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
“Under the plain view doctrine, if police are lawfully in a position from which they view an object that has an incriminating nature that is immediately apparent, and if the officers have a lawful right of access to the object, they may seize it without a warrant.” State v. Leger, 05-0011 p. 65 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Jacobs 67 So. 3d 535 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 43 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Courtney Paul Savoy La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Sparks 68 So. 3d 435 La. 2011
Lindsey, 948 So.2d at 108 ; State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 77 (La.7/10/06), .
State v. Arnold 60 So. 3d 599 La. 2011
2301, 2307 , 110 L.Ed.2d 112 (1990); State v. Leger, 205-0011, p. 65 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Jason Allen Lomax La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2011
State v. Peters 60 So. 3d 672 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
4 Cir. 2/06/08), , writ denied, 2008-0501 (La.9/26/08), .; State v. Leger, 2005-0011, p. 59 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Andrews 61 So. 3d 121 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2011
21/08),12 ; State v. Leger, 05-0011, p. 66 (La.7/10/06), .
State v. Wright 57 So. 3d 465 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2011
State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.07/10/06), -48 , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Edward D. Gresham La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
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 v. Horn 55 So. 3d 100 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Loper 48 So. 3d 1263 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Leger, 2005-0011, p. 43 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Travis Dewayne Megason La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. MEGASON 47 So. 3d 31 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
STANDARD OF REVIEW 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 Ex Rel. Km 49 So. 3d 460 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
2301, 2307 , 110 L.Ed.2d 112 (1990); See also State v. Leger, 2005-0011 (La.7/10/06), .
State ex rel. K.M. 49 So. 3d 460 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2010
2301, 2307 , 110 L.Ed.2d 112 (1990); See also State v. Leger, 2005-0011 (La.7/10/06), .
State v. Mathieu 49 So. 3d 434 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), -48 , cert.
State of Louisiana v. James Jones La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
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. Jones 45 So. 3d 1136 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
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. Burton 43 So. 3d 1073 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Campbell, 2006-0286, p. 73 (La.5/21/08), ; State v. *1077 Leger, 2005-0011, p. 66 (La.7/10/06), .
State v. Dressner 45 So. 3d 127 La. 2010
70 , 175 L.Ed.2d 233 (2009); State v. Coleman, 06-0518 (La.11/2/07), (conviction reversed and death sentence vacated by this Court on a Batson violation; remanded for new trial); State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State of Louisiana v. Louis Vernon Jackson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State of Louisiana v. R. R. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. RR 37 So. 3d 501 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Leger, 05-11, p. 91 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. R.R. 37 So. 3d 501 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
ffender using the mouth or tongue of the offender.” | fiIt 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. Michael D. Sumrall La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State of Louisiana v. Daniel James Broussard La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Sumrall 34 So. 3d 977 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
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. Broussard 34 So. 3d 459 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
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. Spring 30 So. 3d 286 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State of Louisiana v. Wilkes Laird La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2010
State v. Laird 30 So. 3d 1167 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
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. Knight 34 So. 3d 307 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2010
State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.7/10/06), , cert.
State v. Laster 33 So. 3d 259 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2010
State v. Leger, 05-0011 (La.07/10/06), , cert.