Cited by

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

503 citing documents.

State v. Sanders 622 So. 2d 817 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. White 621 So. 2d 884 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1993
State v. Savage 621 So. 2d 641 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Thomas 620 So. 2d 469 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1993
State v. Young 618 So. 2d 1149 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Maxie 614 So. 2d 1318 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Pierre 614 So. 2d 1309 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1993
State v. Daniels 607 So. 2d 620 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. Major 604 So. 2d 137 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. Walker 600 So. 2d 911 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
State v. Gray 598 So. 2d 1215 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Powell 598 So. 2d 454 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. Stevenson 597 So. 2d 74 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
State v. Northern 597 So. 2d 48 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1992
State v. Coleman 590 So. 2d 844 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
State v. Morris 589 So. 2d 1171 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Patterson 588 So. 2d 392 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
State v. Brown 594 So. 2d 372 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
State v. Gene 587 So. 2d 18 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
State v. Gene 587 So. 2d 18 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
State v. Stanford 574 So. 2d 443 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
State v. Harris 573 So. 2d 1195 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1991
State v. Thompson 578 So. 2d 1151 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
simply mean that such evidence, although admissible to support a “guilty mind”, are not alone sufficient to convict.
State v. Hosford 572 So. 2d 242 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
In his brief to this Court, (La.
State v. Alpaugh 568 So. 2d 1379 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Ballom 562 So. 2d 1073 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
State v. Sterling 558 So. 2d 1336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. James 555 So. 2d 519 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. East 553 So. 2d 1046 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Ballom 553 So. 2d 909 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Amos 550 So. 2d 272 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Richardson 547 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Carroll 546 So. 2d 1365 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Jackson 545 So. 2d 1228 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Dominick 545 So. 2d 1149 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Augustine 545 So. 2d 1203 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded La.R.S.
State v. Canova 541 So. 2d 273 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Davis 535 So. 2d 34 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
the court noted: Circumstantial evidence in Louisiana criminal convictions is held to a higher standard.
State v. Baum 533 So. 2d 110 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
State v. Molinario 530 So. 2d 665 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
Since this is a case based on circumstantial evidence, and have found that there is sufficient evidence in the record to find the defendant guilty violating La.Rev.Stat.
State v. Lewis 529 So. 2d 125 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
He argues that the evidence could reasonably support the theory that the victim committed suicide
State v. Loya 527 So. 2d 514 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
writ denied at 449 U.S. 1103 , 101 S.Ct.
State v. Hall 524 So. 2d 179 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1988
State v. Pravata 522 So. 2d 606 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
15:438 (on rehearing), defendant contends that he was entitled to an instruction that, as to each element upon which the state relied upon circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.
State v. Wooley 523 So. 2d 883 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Stratton 521 So. 2d 842 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1988
-388 (La.1983); LRS 15:271, 15:438; Jackson v. Virginia, supra; State v. James, supra.
State v. Nora 520 So. 2d 916 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
State v. Phillips 514 So. 2d 743 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
State v. Mussall 514 So. 2d 505 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
quoting from State v. Go1ld, (which had used a more lengthy quote from a jury charge on reasonable doubt approved by the Supreme Court in State v. Jefferson, 43 La.Ann.
State v. Zone 511 So. 2d 96 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1987
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), which states that the reviewing court must determine whether a reasonable hypothesis of innocence exists, and that if such a hypothesis exists, the conviction must be reversed.