DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Mussall, 523 So. 2d 1305.

1462 citing documents.

  • Donald F. Carabine v. Oliver Degravelle, Jr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    2781, 2789, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State of Louisiana v. Jermaine Perry La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    Jackson v. Virginia is rationality and that “irrational decisions to convict will be overturned, rational decisions to convict will be upheld, and the actual fact finder’s discretion will be impinged upon only to the extent necessary to guarantee the fundamental protection of due process of law.”
  • State v. Perry 9 So. 3d 342 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    However, the touchstone of Jackson v. Virginia is rationality and that “irrational decisions to convict will be overturned, rational decisions to convict will be upheld, and the actual fact finder’s discretion will be impinged upon only to the extent necessary to guarantee the fundamental protection of due process of law.”
  • CARABINE v. DeGRAVELLE 11 So. 3d 85 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    2781, 2789 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State ex rel. D.G. 11 So. 3d 548 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State Ex Rel. Dg 11 So. 3d 548 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
  • State v. Parker 11 So. 3d 534 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Riley 10 So. 3d 1232 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
  • State v. Fields 10 So. 3d 350 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. HLJ 6 So. 3d 997 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    2781, 2789 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State of Louisiana v. H.L. J. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    2781, 2789, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State v. H.L.J. 6 So. 3d 997 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    2781, 2789 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State v. Brown 7 So. 3d 1238 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
  • State v. Vincent 7 So. 3d 1243 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Desoto 6 So. 3d 141 La. 2009
    Judge Pickett dissented from the Third Circuit’s decision on rehearing, citing this Court’s ruling in State v. Ware, 06-1703 (La.6/29/07), , in which we reiterated the standard of review in evaluating sufficiency claims: [A] reviewing court may impinge on the trier of fact’s discretion “only to the extent necessary to guarantee the fundamental due process of law.”
  • State v. Tillman 7 So. 3d 65 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. McGee 5 So. 3d 315 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Wilkerson 5 So. 3d 316 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Ardoin 6 So. 3d 237 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    P. art. 821(B); *240 State v. Ordodi, 2006-0207, p. 10 (La.11/29/06), ; -09 (La.1988).
  • State v. Landry 5 So. 3d 317 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Ambeau 6 So. 3d 215 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Lawrence 5 So. 3d 896 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
  • State v. Sparkman 5 So. 3d 891 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2009
  • State v. Maxwell 8 So. 3d 75 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    Compare, State v. Perron, 94-761 (La.App.
  • State of Louisiana v. Michael W. Smith La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2009
    2781, 2789, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State v. Smith 2 So. 3d 1187 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2009
    2781, 2789 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
  • State v. Calloway 1 So. 3d 417 La. 2009
    A reviewing court may intrude on the plenary discretion of the fact finder “only to the extent necessary to guarantee the fundamental protection of due process of law.” (footnote and citation omitted).
  • State of Louisiana v. Norris A. Palms La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    Weary, 03-3067 at p. 18, 931 So.2d at 311; Neal, 00-0674 at p. 11, 796 So.2d at 658
  • State v. Burnes 997 So. 2d 906 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • State of Louisiana v. Harold Dewayne Baylor, Sr. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    eruditely explains: The Jackson v. Virginia [sic] doctrine involves more than simply applying a fixed standard to measure the simple quantum of the evidence produced in a case.
  • State v. Baylor 998 So. 2d 800 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
  • State v. Boyd 999 So. 2d 40 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • State of Louisiana v. Damon Lee Harmon La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    Weary, 03-3067 at p. 18, 931 So.2d at 311; Neal, 00-0674 at p. 11, 796 So.2d at 658
  • State v. Lowe 994 So. 2d 154 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. Adams 993 So. 2d 377 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • State in the Interest of J. L. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
  • State of Louisiana v. T. V. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    are preserved through the requirement that upon judicial review all of the evidence is to be considered as if by a rational fact finder in the light most favorable to the prosecution.”
  • State v. TV 993 So. 2d 376 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
  • State v. Conner 996 So. 2d 564 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • State v. Robinson 996 So. 2d 56 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • State v. GALMON 993 So. 2d 373 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. Agee 990 So. 2d 95 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • State v. Jackson 987 So. 2d 851 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. Shaw 987 So. 2d 398 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • State v. Rowell 986 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. Ruiz 986 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    2d 654, 660 ; State v. Mussall -09 (La.
  • State v. Lay 986 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. Johnson 985 So. 2d 1259 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
  • State v. Smith 984 So. 2d 238 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    Weary, 03-3067 at p. 18, 931 So.2d at 311 ; Neal , 00-0674 at p. 11, 796 So.2d at 658 ; (La.
  • State of Louisiana v. Jeremy Dwayne Smith La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2008
    Weary, 03-3067 at p. 18, 931 So.2d at 311; Neal, 00-0674 at p. 11, 796 So.2d at 658