Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Lubrano, 563 So. 2d 847.

128 citing documents.

State of Louisiana v. Mervin Latigue La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2007
State v. Robertson, 96-1048, p. 1 (La.10/4/96)
State of Louisiana v. Larry Surratt and Cynthia Anderson La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. Surratt 932 So. 2d 736 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2006
State v. Robertson, 96-1048, p. 1 (La.10/4/96)
State v. Pigford 922 So. 2d 517 La. 2006
State v. Robertson, 96-1048, p. 1 (La.10/4/96)
State v. Lewis 916 So. 2d 294 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
State v. Hartwell, 03-1214, p. 9 (La.App.
State v. Allen 913 So. 2d 788 La. 2005
State v. Higgins 898 So. 2d 1219 La. 2005
State v. McGee 895 So. 2d 780 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
State v. Johnson , XXXX-XXXX (La.App.
State v. Hartwell 866 So. 2d 899 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
State of Louisiana v. Scott Allen Cooper La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
jury as the factfinder in the case but it does not allow jurors “‘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. Cooper 862 So. 2d 512 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2003
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), preserves the role of the jury as the factfinder in the case but it does not allow jurors "`to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.'" [quoting 2A C. Wright, Federal Practice & Procedure, Criminal 2d § 467 (2d ed.1982) ]
State v. Fields 842 So. 2d 316 La. 2003
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) does not permit a trier of fact to speculate when the evidence “is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.” (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
State v. Bedford 838 So. 2d 758 La. 2003
(A jury "cannot be permitted to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.")(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
State v. Bright 776 So. 2d 1134 La. 2000
reciation of the evidence for that of the jury, "`the jury cannot be permitted to speculate if the evidence is such that reasonable jurors must have a reasonable doubt.'" (quoting 2 Charles Alan Wright, Federal Practice & Procedure, Criminal 2d § 467 (2d ed.1982)); see also State v. Pierre, 93-0893 (La.2/3/94)
State v. Knight 738 So. 2d 1179 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1999
State v. Robertson, 96-1048 (La.10/4/96), ().
State v. Richardson 729 So. 2d 114 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
State v. Johnson 726 So. 2d 1126 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
State v. Henry 709 So. 2d 322 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1998
State v. Robertson 680 So. 2d 1165 La. 1996
State v. Bowman 677 So. 2d 1094 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
[quoting 2 C. Wright, Federal Practice & Procedure, Criminal 2d § 467 (2d ed. 1982)]
State v. Guy 669 So. 2d 517 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1996
State v. Harris 647 So. 2d 337 La. 1994
but it also does not allow jurors 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. Long 643 So. 2d 132 La. 1994
State v. Pierre 631 So. 2d 427 La. 1994
2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), preserves the role of the jury as the factfinder in the case but it does not allow jurors "`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. Jones 610 So. 2d 782 La. 1992
State v. Fortune 608 So. 2d 148 La. 1992
State v. Corkern 593 So. 2d 1259 La. 1992
State v. Bruce 577 So. 2d 209 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1991
(writ granted and remanded to Court of Appeal for reconsideration in light of State v. Mussall), (La.App.