Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Shapiro, 431 So. 2d 372.

503 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Perry L. Briley La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. Alfred C. Simmons La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2025
App. 4 Cir. 1984) ( (La.
State of Louisiana v. Joshua Wiggins La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. Joshua Cornell Palmer La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. Zachary Markey Adams A/K/A Zachary Adams A/K/A Zachary Batiste La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2025
State of Louisiana v. Teddrick Jawad Jones La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2024
State Ex Rel. Darrell J. Robinson v. Darrel Vannoy, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, Angola, Louisiana La. 2024
State of Louisiana v. Christopher M Alexander La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
App. 4 Cir. 1984) ( (La.
State of Louisiana v. A. L. Simmons, II La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2024
State of Louisiana v. James Jefferson La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2024
State of Louisiana Versus George Cepriano, Jr. La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2022
State of Louisiana v. Dwight Washington La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2021
App. 4 Cir. 1984) ( (La.
State Of Louisiana v. James Bourgeois La. 2021
As an evidentiary rule, it restrains the factfinder in the first instance, as well as the reviewer on appeal, to accept as proven all that the evidence tends to prove and then to convict only if every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded.” (La.
State of Louisiana v. Kentrell Hickerson La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
State of Louisiana Versus Jakorey Williams La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2020
Thompson, 259 So.3d at 1265 ( (La.
State of Louisiana v. Leo Dorsey La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2020
State of Louisiana Versus Emmett Garrison, IV AKA "Lil Emmet" La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2020
State of Louisiana v. Raven Lamar Wiltz La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2019
State of Louisiana in the Interest of J.P. . La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2019
State v. Thompson 259 So. 3d 1257 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2018
State v. Shapiro , , 378 (La.
State v. Hampton 261 So. 3d 993 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2018
State of Louisiana v. George E. Byrd AKA George Byrd La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
1266 (2003) (alteration in original), the supreme court stated: “[h]ypotheses of innocence are merely methods for the trier of fact to determine the existence of a reasonable doubt arising from the evidence or lack of evidence.” (on reh’g )(Lemmon, J., concurring).
State ex rel. W.S. 250 So. 3d 1060 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Sandifer 249 So. 3d 142 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Alridge 249 So. 3d 260 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 12/3/97), , 228 ( ).
State v. Hutsell 241 So. 3d 542 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2018
App. 4 Cir. 12/3/97), , 228 (citing State v. Shapiro , (La.
State v. Raine 238 So. 3d 1076 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2018
State v. Shapiro , , 378 (La.
State v. Hawkins 219 So. 3d 1133 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
App. 4 Cir. 12/14/16), , (La.
State v. Green 220 So. 3d 103 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
State of Louisiana v. Joenell Rubin La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2017
Further, “[t]he test of the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence is not whether it produces the same conviction as the positive testimony of an eyewitness, but whether it produces moral conviction such as would exclude every reasonable doubt.” (citing State v. Jenkins, 134 La.
State v. Rubin 211 So. 3d 532 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2017
Further, “[t]he test of the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence is not whether it produces the same conviction as the positive testimony of an eyewitness, but whether it produces moral conviction such as would exclude every reasonable doubt.” (citing State v. Jenkins, 134 La.
State v. Castro 206 So. 3d 1059 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
Similarly, when circumstantial evidence forms the basis of a conviction, such evidence must consist of “proof of collateral facts and circumstances from which the existence of the main fact may be inferred according to reason and common experience.” (La.
State v. Wells 203 So. 3d 233 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Matthews 200 So. 3d 895 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Van Sales, 38,138 (La.App.2d Cir.3/3/04), , writ denied, 2004-1305 (La.4/22/05), .
State v. Jackson 193 So. 3d 425 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Dove 194 So. 3d 92 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Clements 194 So. 3d 712 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
facts and circumstances from which the existence of the main fact may be inferred according to reason and common experience.”
State v. Everette 192 So. 3d 249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Adam Batiste, III La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2016
In brief, wherein the supreme court reversed a second degree murder conviction founded on circumstantial evidence because the state failed to exclude the reasonable hypothesis that the victim committed suicide.
State v. Amos 192 So. 3d 822 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Batiste 189 So. 3d 580 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
In brief, wherein the supreme court reversed a second degree murder conviction founded on circumstantial evidence because the state failed to exclude the reasonable hypothesis that the victim committed suicide.
State v. Lambert 191 So. 3d 630 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State of Louisiana v. Quint Mire 269 So. 3d 698 La. 2016
whether it produces moral conviction such as would exclude every reasonable doubt.” (La.
State v. Gibson 186 So. 3d 772 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2016
State v. Garrison 184 So. 3d 164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Rumley 183 So. 3d 640 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Jones 182 So. 3d 251 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. Hernandez 177 So. 3d 342 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2015
“Circumstantial evidence consists of proof of collateral facts and circumstances from which the existence of the main fact may be inferred according to reason and common experience.” Williams, 904 So.2d at 833 .
State v. Davis 176 So. 3d 580 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015
State v. White 174 So. 3d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2015