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. Mitchell, 772 So. 2d 78.

303 citing documents.

  • State v. Collins 998 So. 2d 765 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), ; State v. Davis, 92-1623 (La.5/23/94), , cert.
  • State v. Butler 997 So. 2d 631 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2008
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 7 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Durham 996 So. 2d 642 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2008
    See State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), (Lemmon, J, concurring).
  • State v. GALMON 993 So. 2d 373 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. Hebert 986 So. 2d 256 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth the following precepts for appellate review of circumstantial evidence in connection with review of the sufficiency of the evidence: On appeal, the reviewing court "does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by a defendant could afford an exculpatory explan
  • State v. Lay 986 So. 2d 255 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State Ex Rel. Gb 985 So. 2d 828 La. Ct. App. 4th Cir. 2008
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth the law of principals: All persons can be convicted as a principal to a crime if he is "concerned in the commission of a crime, whether present or absent, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, aid and abet in its commission, or directly *831 or indir
  • State ex rel. G.B. 985 So. 2d 828 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court set forth the law of principals: All persons can be convicted as a principal to a crime if he is “concerned in the commission of a crime, whether present or absent, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, aid and abet in its commission, or direct *831 ly or indi
  • State v. Lizotte 977 So. 2d 303 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. McGeorge 977 So. 2d 305 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2008
  • State v. Calloway 978 So. 2d 374 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
    See State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 8 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. LEAGEA 966 So. 2d 1249 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
  • State v. Adams 966 So. 2d 1247 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
  • State v. Alsup 968 So. 2d 1152 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2007
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), ; State v. Davis, 92-1623 (La.5/23/94), , cert.
  • State v. Arnold 970 So. 2d 1067 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2007
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 8 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Browning 956 So. 2d 65 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. King 951 So. 2d 384 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2007
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Price 952 So. 2d 112 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    See State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 8 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Morgan 948 So. 2d 199 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Love 947 So. 2d 161 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    This Court is also “constitutionally precluded from acting as a ‘thirteenth juror’ in assessing what weight to give *167 evidence in criminal cases; that determination rests solely on the sound discretion of the trier of fact.” State v. Mitchell, p. 8, 1999-3342 (La.10/17/00), , (La.App.
  • State v. Templet 943 So. 2d 412 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 8 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Young 938 So. 2d 90 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    [4] State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), ; State v. Jones, supra .
  • State v. Jolly 925 So. 2d 633 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2006
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. King 922 So. 2d 1207 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), (emphasis as found in the original).
  • State v. Hooker 921 So. 2d 1066 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2006
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 7 (La.10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appeal, the reviewing court "does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by a defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events."
  • State v. Dobbins 920 So. 2d 278 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Morris 917 So. 2d 633 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State of Louisiana v. Dustin K. Runyon La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    10/17/00), (emphasis added), the supreme court set forth the law of principals, stating: All persons can be convicted as a principal to a crime if he is “concerned in the commission of a crime, whether present or absent, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, aid and
  • State v. Runyon 916 So. 2d 407 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2005
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, pp. 5-6 (La.10/17/00), (emphasis added), the supreme court set forth the law of principals, stating: All persons can be convicted as a principal to a crime if he is "concerned in the commission of a crime, whether present or absent, and whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, aid and abet in its commission, or dir
  • State v. Lewis 916 So. 2d 294 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 7 (La.10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appeal, the reviewing court "does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by a the Defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events."
  • State v. Gardner 907 So. 2d 793 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Clark 909 So. 2d 1007 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    14:10(1); State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 9 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Pagan 905 So. 2d 435 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    [8] See, State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), -85 , in which the supreme court found that the defendant's untruthful statement to the police was indicative of his guilty mind.
  • State v. Stone 904 So. 2d 810 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    [5] State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), (emphasis as found in the original).
  • State v. Williams 904 So. 2d 830 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 7 (La.10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appeal, the reviewing court "does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by a the Defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events."
  • State v. Jones 902 So. 2d 426 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 7 (La.10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appeal, the reviewing court "does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by a the Defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events."
  • State v. Yrle 901 So. 2d 470 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 7 (La.10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appeal, the reviewing court "does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by a the Defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events."...
  • State v. Mitchell 894 So. 2d 1240 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 2005
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Martin 895 So. 2d 55 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2005
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court commented: On appeal, the reviewing court "does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by a defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events."
  • State v. Sosa 892 So. 2d 633 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), (emphasis as found in the original).
  • State v. Ingram 888 So. 2d 923 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 7 (La.10/17/00), , the Louisiana Supreme Court stated: On appeal, the reviewing court "does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by a the Defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation *926 of the events."
  • State v. Kibbe 887 So. 2d 565 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Crockett 886 So. 2d 1139 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2004
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Housley 884 So. 2d 1204 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Severin 885 So. 2d 609 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    In State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 7 (La.10/17/00), (emphasis as found in the original), the Louisiana Supreme Court commented: On appeal, the reviewing court "does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by a defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events."
  • State v. Falkins 880 So. 2d 903 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Wiley 880 So. 2d 854 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
  • State v. Jackson 880 So. 2d 841 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    [5] State v. Mitchell, 99-3342, p. 7 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Harris 871 So. 2d 599 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .
  • State v. Pierre 869 So. 2d 206 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 2004
    2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); State v. Mitchell, 99-3342 (La.10/17/00), .