Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite State v. Ragas, 744 So. 2d 99.

110 citing documents.

State v. Boudreaux 777 So. 2d 596 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
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. McZeal 779 So. 2d 826 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
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. Martin 788 So. 2d 1 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
4 Cir. 7/28/99), -7 , quoting State v. Egana, 97-0318, pp. 5-6 (La.
State v. Carter 773 So. 2d 268 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
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. Marshall 774 So. 2d 244 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
4 Cir. 7/28/99) , , as follows: In evaluating whether evidence is constitutionally sufficient to support a conviction, an appellate court must determine *251 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 769 So. 2d 28 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
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. Mims 769 So. 2d 44 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
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. Bullock 767 So. 2d 124 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2000
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. Monette 758 So. 2d 362 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2000
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. Drummer 750 So. 2d 360 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 1999
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.