Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Captville, 448 So. 2d 676.

1134 citing documents.

State v. McGeorge 977 So. 2d 305 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
State v. Guidroz 977 So. 2d 304 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
State of Louisiana v. Paul D. Massey La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
State v. Parks 977 So. 2d 1015 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.
State v. Gonzalez 975 So. 2d 3 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Fedele 973 So. 2d 177 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State v. Smith 974 So. 2d 79 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
State v. Neal, 00-0674 (La.6/29/01), ( (La.
State v. Boyd 972 So. 2d 1240 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. Kearney Alsandor La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. ALSANDOR 970 So. 2d 113 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. London 973 So. 2d 782 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
5 Cir. 6/1/99), , writ denied, 99-2057 (La.1/14/00)
State v. Calloway 978 So. 2d 374 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State v. LANUS 966 So. 2d 1247 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. James Oliver McKeehan, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Jenkins 970 So. 2d 1166 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.
State of Louisiana v. Rickie Cuskey and Debra McAnulty La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Laurent 966 So. 2d 826 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. Jake C. Desoto La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Desoto 968 So. 2d 146 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.
State v. Harrell 965 So. 2d 479 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
State v. Neal, 00-0674, (La.6/29/01)[,] ().
State v. Latin 960 So. 2d 1186 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. Charles Hatch La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
[T]he appellate court must determine that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient to convince a rational trier of fact that all of the elements of the crime had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”
State v. Hatch 964 So. 2d 394 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Richards 956 So. 2d 160 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.
State of Louisiana v. Huey Lee Richards La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS JENNIFER RENEE ROBERSON A/K/A JENNIFER ROBERTSON A/K/A JENNIFER THOMAS La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Roberson 956 So. 2d 736 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.
State of Louisiana v. Jeremy D. Lee La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Lee 957 So. 2d 220 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Rose 955 So. 2d 270 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
State of Louisiana v. Mervin Latigue La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State of Louisiana v. George Commeta Jacobs La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State in the Interest of S. R. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Wilson 956 So. 2d 41 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
State v. Neal, 00-0674 (La.6/29/01), ().
State v. Singleton 953 So. 2d 168 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Neal, 00-0674, (La.6/29/01)[,] ().
State of Louisiana v. Jake C. Desoto La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State of Louisiana v. Justin Charles Singleton La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
late court “must determine that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient to convince a rational trier of fact that all of the elements of the crime had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Neal, 00-0674, (La.6/29/01)[,] ().
State of Louisiana v. W.D.F., Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Allen 954 So. 2d 779 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
State v. Washington 952 So. 2d 798 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
Under this standard, the appellate court “must determine that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient to convince a rational trier of fact that all of the elements of the crime had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Neal, 00-0674, (La.6/29/01), ().
State v. Washington 952 So. 2d 798 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2007
State v. Neal, 00-0674, (La.6/29/01), ().
State of Louisiana v. Deandre Johnson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
[T]he appellate court must determine that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient to convince a rational trier of fact that all of the elements of the crime had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.”
State v. Johnson 948 So. 2d 1229 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Draughn 950 So. 2d 583 La. 2007
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Ramsdell 949 So. 2d 508 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
State v. Batiste 947 So. 2d 810 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
State v. Neal, 00-0674 (La.6/29/01), ().
State of Louisiana v. Ronnie Kurt Hongo, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Love 947 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
eless, as was stated by the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Francois, p. 4, 2003-1313 (La.4/14/04), , 128: In cases involving circumstantial evidence, when the jury reasonably rejects the hypothesis of innocence advanced by the defense, “that hypothesis falls, and the defendant is guilty unless there is another | inhypothesis which raises a reasonable doubt.”
State v. Hongo 944 So. 2d 856 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.
State v. Hughes 943 So. 2d 1047 La. 2006