Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Smith, 441 So. 2d 739.

101 citing documents.

State v. Acevedo 633 So. 2d 828 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1994
State v. Jackson 629 So. 2d 1374 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Jackson 629 So. 2d 1374 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Brown 628 So. 2d 207 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Hopkins 626 So. 2d 820 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. *822 Smith, (La.App.
State v. Robinson 624 So. 2d 1260 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Jeffers 623 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Wilson 623 So. 2d 200 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Green 621 So. 2d 629 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Essex 618 So. 2d 659 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Perry 612 So. 2d 986 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1993
State v. Thomas 609 So. 2d 1078 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. Bryant 607 So. 2d 11 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. Walker 600 So. 2d 911 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1992
State v. Love 602 So. 2d 1014 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
State v. Combs 600 So. 2d 751 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. Washington 597 So. 2d 1084 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. Washington 597 So. 2d 1084 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. Dorsey 593 So. 2d 1372 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1992
That article codifies the Jackson v. Virginia [1] standard for sufficiency of the evidence, (La.
State v. White 593 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. White 593 So. 2d 882 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1992
State v. Grillette 588 So. 2d 1338 La. Ct. App. 2d 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. Bailey 585 So. 2d 1245 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
State v. Larson 579 So. 2d 1050 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1991
State v. Roquemore 574 So. 2d 473 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
State v. Reaves 569 So. 2d 650 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Lard 568 So. 2d 629 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Speights 546 So. 2d 346 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Thompson 544 So. 2d 421 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1989
State v. Saddler 538 So. 2d 1073 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Courville 536 So. 2d 661 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Delahoussaye 534 So. 2d 76 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1988
State v. Romero 533 So. 2d 1264 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1988
State v. Brian 502 So. 2d 293 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Ourso 502 So. 2d 246 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1987
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Owens 501 So. 2d 968 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1987
15:438] may not establish a stricter standard of review than the more general reasonable juror’s reasonable doubt formula, it emphasizes the need for careful observation of the usual standard, and provides a helpful methodology for its implementation in cases which hinge on the evaluation of the circumstantial evidence.”
State v. Woods 494 So. 2d 1258 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Jacobs 493 So. 2d 766 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1986
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.App.
State v. Jackson 480 So. 2d 937 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
State v. Long 473 So. 2d 901 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
State v. Gultry 471 So. 2d 804 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1985
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Milton 469 So. 2d 309 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
As Chism points out, the circumstantial evidence rule of LSA-R.S.
State v. Effit 467 So. 2d 856 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
State v. Carprue 468 So. 2d 602 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
State v. Wade 467 So. 2d 1191 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
As Chism points out, the circumstantial evidence rule simply emphasizes the need for more careful observation and provides a helpful methodology for its implementation in cases which hinge on an evaluation of circumstantial evidence.
State v. Elliott 467 So. 2d 1144 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1985
State v. Malonson 454 So. 2d 371 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1984
involved an almost identical factual situation as the instant case.
State v. Willis 446 So. 2d 795 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1984