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. Ragas, 744 So. 2d 99.

110 citing documents.

  • State v. Love 947 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Cuccia 933 So. 2d 134 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2006
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Clark 904 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2005
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Jones 891 So. 2d 760 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Allen 876 So. 2d 122 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2004
  • State v. Wallace 862 So. 2d 286 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to -the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Toups 859 So. 2d 768 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Walker 844 So. 2d 1060 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
  • State v. Lee 844 So. 2d 970 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have *989 found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Price 842 So. 2d 491 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Alvey 839 So. 2d 395 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2003
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Davis 839 So. 2d 176 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2003
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Everidge 834 So. 2d 1197 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Lewis 834 So. 2d 528 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
  • State v. Coleman 830 So. 2d 341 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Hurst 828 So. 2d 1165 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Clark 828 So. 2d 1173 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Mayeux 820 So. 2d 524 La. 2002
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , for the proposition that the penalty set out in the statute at the time of the offense applies, the court of appeal granted the State's writ application.
  • State v. Houston 818 So. 2d 253 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
  • State v. Robinson 820 So. 2d 571 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Allien 814 So. 2d 743 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
  • State v. Plaisance 811 So. 2d 1172 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , the well-settled standard for reviewing convictions for sufficiency of the evidence.
  • State v. Keith 811 So. 2d 136 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2002
  • State v. Moore 809 So. 2d 520 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2002
  • State v. Huckabay 809 So. 2d 1093 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2002
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Moses 806 So. 2d 83 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt Jackson v. Virg
  • State v. Beavers 803 So. 2d 333 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2001
    4th Cir.7/28/99), -107 ).
  • State v. Spencer 802 So. 2d 811 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Carter 798 So. 2d 1181 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Legendre 798 So. 2d 1179 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Serpas 798 So. 2d 1178 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
  • State v. Offray 797 So. 2d 764 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Moore 797 So. 2d 756 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    App. 4 Cir. 7/28/99), , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of act could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Vicks 798 So. 2d 308 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Allen 793 So. 2d 426 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    App. 4 Cir. 7/28/99), , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of act could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Alvarez 792 So. 2d 875 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to |4support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Washington 793 So. 2d 376 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of act could have *387 found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Washington 793 So. 2d 376 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of act could have *387 found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Bloodworth 790 So. 2d 118 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Tapp 788 So. 2d 1215 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , -107 ).
  • State v. Knight 794 So. 2d 33 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Baudier 789 So. 2d 696 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of act could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Toups 792 So. 2d 18 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Allen 794 So. 2d 25 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , -107 , quoting from State v. Egana, 97-0318, p. 5-6 (La.App.
  • State v. Harris 787 So. 2d 420 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Hebert 787 So. 2d 1041 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Washington 788 So. 2d 477 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the ^evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a rea *491 sonable doubt.
  • State v. Washington 788 So. 2d 477 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable *491 doubt.
  • State v. Morgan 779 So. 2d 17 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • State v. Hodge 781 So. 2d 575 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2001
    4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.