Cited by

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

1462 citing documents.

State v. Bishop 571 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Ruffin 572 So. 2d 232 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Reaves 569 So. 2d 650 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Meshell 567 So. 2d 1181 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.App.
State v. Lard 568 So. 2d 629 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Williams 567 So. 2d 735 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Holland, supra .
State v. Hatcher 568 So. 2d 578 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
the State has not met its burden of proof because no rational trier of fact would have believed the victim's story.
State v. Moore 568 So. 2d 612 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
the Supreme Court stated: After reviewing Jackson and the foregoing authorities, we conclude that a reviewing court may not disregard its duty under due process of law as interpreted by Jackson v. Virginia simply because the record contains testimony which tends to support each fact necessary to const
Harrington v. Velinsky 567 So. 2d 148 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Shepherd 566 So. 2d 1127 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1990
State v. Wright 564 So. 2d 1269 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) (1988); the prosecution erred in shifting the burden of proof to the defense, before the trial jury, denying defendant due process and equal protection of the law, in violation of his Fourteenth Amendment rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution; the trial court erred in imposing an excessive sentence on the defenda
State v. Lubrano 563 So. 2d 847 La. 1990
Nevertheless, "`the jury cannot be permitted to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.'" [quoting 2 C. Wright, Federal Practice & Procedure, Criminal 2d § 467 (2d ed. 1982)].
State v. Weiland 562 So. 2d 950 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.App.
State v. Daigrepont 560 So. 2d 959 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.App.
State v. Neidlinger 560 So. 2d 526 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
State v. Sonnier 558 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
: "First, a review of a criminal conviction record for sufficiency of evidence does not require a court to `ask itself whether it believes that the evidence at the trial established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt' ...
Galentine v. First Family Financial Services 557 So. 2d 1164 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 , 105 S.Ct.
State v. Sterling 558 So. 2d 1336 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Fuqua 558 So. 2d 740 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1990
the Louisiana Supreme Court further explained the steps involved in applying the Jackson standard.
State v. Sanders 558 So. 2d 785 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Lewis 557 So. 2d 980 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1990
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Augustine 555 So. 2d 1331 La. 1990
State v. Trosclair, supra.
Nichols v. US Rentals, Inc. 556 So. 2d 600 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 , 105 S.Ct.
Sicarelli v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 556 So. 2d 179 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1990
Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 , 105 S.Ct.
State v. Wiggins 556 So. 2d 622 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1990
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); (La.
State v. Maxwell 554 So. 2d 769 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1989
State v. Dozier 553 So. 2d 911 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. West 553 So. 2d 945 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
Defendant points to certain "eccentricities" contained in Mrs. Rodrigues' testimony to support his contention
State v. Prophet 552 So. 2d 773 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Crocker 551 So. 2d 707 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Westmoreland 551 So. 2d 719 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
The requirement that the evidence be viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution obliges the reviewing court to defer to “[t]he actual trier of fact’s rational credibility calls, evidence weighing and inference drawing.” citing Jackson v. Virginia, supra.
State v. Lubrano 550 So. 2d 1283 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
the Supreme Court stated: (1) After reviewing Jackson and the foregoing authorities, we conclude that a reviewing court may not disregard its duty under due process of law as interpreted by Jackson v. Virginia, simply because the record contains testimony which tends to support each fact necessary to
State v. Burger 550 So. 2d 1282 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Bacot 551 So. 2d 29 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)
State v. Richard 550 So. 2d 300 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Gibson 550 So. 2d 263 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
Defendant contends that this lack of evidence, coupled with the evidence that the defendant and Linden-stein were having a dispute over money
Rosell v. Esco 549 So. 2d 840 La. 1989
Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564 , 105 S.Ct.
State v. Bailey 549 So. 2d 414 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Hollingsworth 550 So. 2d 663 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Richardson 547 So. 2d 749 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Kimble 546 So. 2d 834 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Hamilton 546 So. 2d 554 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Toups 546 So. 2d 549 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
NOTES [*] Defendant acknowledges that the victim testified that defendant forced her to touch him but claims that this testimony must be disregarded because, when she was initially asked whether or not defendant made her touch him, the victim shook her head negatively; and, contradictory testimony cannot be considered.
State v. Cashen 544 So. 2d 1268 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
which would cause this court to discount their entire testimony.
State v. Barrett 544 So. 2d 654 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
defendant contends that defendant’s conviction should be reversed because the Louisiana Supreme Court has *659 held that testimony alone which would support each fact necessary to constitute a crime, in and of itself, is not sufficient -when the testimony of a Stat
State v. Swan 544 So. 2d 1204 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1989
State v. Holland 544 So. 2d 461 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1989
State v. Thomas 543 So. 2d 540 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1989
State v. Burger 541 So. 2d 842 La. 1989
State v. Burger 541 So. 2d 842 La. 1989