La. Stat. Ann. § 15:438

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State v. Jones · filed 2005-04-26

In cases involving circumstantial evidence, La.R.S. 15:438 mandates that "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." ... Thus, we find that, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant was guilty of attempted possession of cocaine, and that the evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State ex rel. E.D.C. · filed 2005-05-11

We find this evidence sufficient to prove that EDC committed the crime of unauthorized entry of a business beyond a reasonable doubt to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Leger · filed 2005-06-01

As discussed above, when a conviction rests on circumstantial evidence, every reasonable hypothesis of innocence must be excluded.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State v. Brown · filed 2005-06-29

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." Neal, 796 So.2d at 657. ... After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the circumstantial evidence presented at defendant's trial was sufficient to prove that he committed first degree murder and excluded any reasonable hypothesis of his innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, subject to the Jackson sufficiency standard.

State of Louisiana v. Davis · filed 2005-12-30

Moreover, when circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of a crime, La.R.S. 15:438 mandates that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” However, this requirement is also subject to the Jackson sufficiency standard.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State of Louisiana v. Morris · filed 2005-12-30

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” ... Accordingly, we find that when the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, it excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before it can support a conviction.

State v. Joseph · filed 2006-01-17

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove a case, the trial judge must instruct the jury that, "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." La. R.S. 15:438. ... Based on the foregoing, we find that there was sufficient evidence for a rational trier of fact, viewing the evidence in a light favorable to the State, to find that all reasonable hypotheses of innocence were excluded.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State v. Allen · filed 2006-03-29

After a thorough review of the record, we are convinced the evidence presented herein, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, all of the elements of second degree robbery and the defendant's identity as a perpetrator of that offense.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before a conviction can stand.

State of Louisiana v. Roland Chambers · filed 2006-05-24

Given the conflicting expert testimony regarding the effect of the level of OxyContin present in Cassidy, the lack of evidence concerning exactly what occurred in Choplin’s bathroom, the presence of eight recent puncture marks on Cassidy’s arm, and Dr. Laga’s testimony concerning the possibility of Cassidy injecting himself twice within a short period of time, we find that the state has failed to carry its burden of excluding every reasonable hypothesis of innocence as required by La.R.S. 15:438.

When the State relies solely on circumstantial evidence to prove intent to distribute, Section 15:438 requires it to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Durgan · filed 2006-05-31

Because the State only used circumstantial evidence to prove Defendant’s intent to distribute, it must have excluded every other reasonable hypothesis.

Section 15:438 requires the overall circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Thomas · filed 2006-06-09

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the trier of fact must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... The jury could have reasonably disregarded the hypothesis that, even sober, the defendant could not have avoided the accident.

Section 15:438 requires the trier of fact to find that circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Godbolt · filed 2006-11-03

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the trier of fact must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Accordingly, we find that a reasonable juror could have excluded the unreasonable hypothesis that the defendant mistakenly believed that he had permission to break into a vehicle and destructively remove a stereo.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Smith · filed 2006-11-21

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... Taking all of the testimony in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the State provided sufficient evidence to rebut the appellant's hypothesis of innocence that he was on the premises with the permission of the owners or their agents.

Section 15:438 permits a conviction based on circumstantial evidence only when the evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Rideau · filed 2006-12-06

Circumstantial evidence can be used to convict a person of a crime only when all other reasonable explanations consistent with innocence are negated. La. R.S. 15:438 provides that "[t]he rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." ... Officer Wanfluh had his own vantage point for observing the actions of Mr. Rideau, and although it is reasonable to conclude that Officer Wanfluh was apprehensive in the situation in which he found himself, that is not the only conclusion that can be reached. Thus, the evidence did not show that Mr. Rideau was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the crime of aggravated assault with a firearm regarding Officer Wanfluh.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; on appeal, the court assesses whether a rational jury could reject the defense’s hypothesis.

State v. Love · filed 2006-12-06

The jury in this matter was presented with a reasonable hypothesis of innocence and rejected it.

Section 15:438 requires the evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before a conviction based on circumstantial evidence can stand.

State v. Price · filed 2006-12-28

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that, in order to convict, the factfinder must be satisfied the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Considering that the defendant and Porche were the only two people in his truck when it wrecked, and that nothing in the facts indicate that Porche was ever in the driver's seat of the defendant's truck, the alternative hypothesis that Porche was driving was sufficiently excluded.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Draughn · filed 2007-01-17

Additionally, where circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove." La. R.S. 15:438; see State v. Neal , XXXX-XXXX p. 9 (La.6/29/01), 796 So.2d 649, 657, cert. denied, 535 U.S. 940, 122 S.Ct. 1323, 152 L.Ed.2d 231 (2002).

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and guides review of whether a rational juror could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Allen · filed 2007-03-07

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, supra , but rather an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. ... This is purely speculative, as opposed to the known facts that the defendant, in a rage, had beaten and threatened to kill Llewellyn within approximately one and one-half hours before he was stabbed to death, and that Llewellyn was last seen alive with the defendant in that same time frame.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Rose · filed 2007-04-13

Accordingly, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state and assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tended to prove, the evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and established the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before a conviction.

State v. Benton · filed 2007-06-20

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." ... These circumstances strongly suggest that Benton entered (and left) the house. ... The evidence was sufficient to prove Benton's intent to commit a theft therein.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before it can support a conviction.

State v. Gage · filed 2007-08-29

To convict a defendant based upon circumstantial evidence, every reasonable hypothesis of innocence must be excluded. State v. Barakat, supra , citing La. R.S. 15:438. ... The testimony of the officers' observations of the defendant's condition and his recklessness amply support the conviction.

Circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State v. Henry · filed 2007-09-19

To convict a Defendant based upon circumstantial evidence, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. State v. Barakat, supra , citing La. R.S. 15:438. ... There was sufficient evidence from which a rational fact finder could determine that Defendant knew he was possessing a controlled dangerous substance and these circumstances exclude all reasonable theories of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before it can support a conviction.

State v. Dudley · filed 2007-09-19

After a thorough review of the record, we are convinced that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the state, proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, all of the elements of Medicaid fraud and money laundering and defendant's identity as a perpetrator of those offenses.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence used to prove an offense to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence as part of the reasonable doubt inquiry.

State v. Brown · filed 2007-09-25

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." State v. Wooten, 99-181 (La.App. 5 Cir. 6/1/99), 738 So.2d 672, 675, writ denied, 99-2057 (La.1/14/00), 753 So.2d 208. This is not a separate test from the Jackson standard, but rather provides a helpful basis for determining the existence of reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence used to convict to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Taylor · filed 2007-10-24

To convict a defendant based upon circumstantial evidence, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. State v. Barakat, supra , citing La. R.S. 15:438. ... Accordingly, we find that the State presented sufficient evidence from which a rational jury could determine that Defendant had the specific intent to kill Reed and that he attempted to do so by firing the handgun at Reed.

Section 15:438 requires the fact finder and reviewing court to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when circumstantial evidence proves an essential element.

State v. Alsup · filed 2007-10-24

In all cases where an essential element of the crime is not proven by direct evidence, the evidentiary rule on circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438, applies. It restrains the fact finder in the first instance, as well as the reviewer on appeal, to accept as proven all that the evidence tends to prove and then to convict only if every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. ... The defense attempted to establish alternate theories of the burglary, specifically that Defendant's wife and her ex-husband entered the home. These theories apparently were not believed by the jury. As the State points out in its brief, the theory would not seem plausible because Defendant was the only person who had possession of the checks and received the majority of the benefits from the proceeds of the burglary.

Section 15:438 requires the trier of fact to find that circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Calloway · filed 2007-11-07

Furthermore, when analyzing circumstantial evidence, Louisiana Revised Statutes 15:438 provides that the trier of fact must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Application of the Chester precepts to the instant matter convinces us that a rational trier of fact could not have concluded that the evidence as admitted excluded a reasonable hypothesis that Ms. Calloway had no knowledge that the vehicles were stolen.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and guides appellate review of whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Lopez · filed 2007-11-07

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, supra , but rather an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and provides a method for assessing reasonable doubt rather than a separate standard.

State v. Bell · filed 2007-12-05

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, the provisions of La. R.S. 15:438 mandate that, assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, every reasonable hypothesis of innocence must be excluded in order to convict. The provisions of La. R.S. 15:438 do not establish a separate standard from the Jackson standard, but rather provide a helpful methodology for determining the existence of reasonable doubt; ultimately, all evidence, both direct and circumstantial, must be sufficient to support the conclusion that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Fedele · filed 2007-12-21

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... After a careful review of the record and viewing all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, we find that any rational trier of fact could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of any reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that the defendant was under the influence of methadone at the time she operated the vehicle on the night in question and, therefore, was guilty of DWI, fourth offense.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before it can support a conviction.

State v. Sims · filed 2007-12-21

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... The only indication of possible guilty knowledge was the defendant's flight from the officers. However, this flight could reasonably be explained as the defendant's attempt to avoid apprehension for the cocaine he possessed. Thus, we find the State failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant had constructive possession of the firearm.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming the facts the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Gonzalez · filed 2007-12-27

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 mandates that "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." ... Specifically, the facts established by the direct evidence and inferred from the circumstances established by that evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, were sufficient for a rational trier of fact to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was guilty of every essential element of the crime.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence used to convict to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Guidroz · filed 2008-02-08

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Buckenberger · filed 2008-02-08

The jury reasonably rejected the hypothesis of innocence presented by the defendant's testimony (that the defendant was trying to calm the victim who was upset with him because he could not have sex with her), and the evidence did not support another hypothesis that raised a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Brantley · filed 2008-02-13

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." ... Although the proof of possession is circumstantial, is excludes every other reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Wright · filed 2008-03-05

To convict a defendant based upon circumstantial evidence, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. State v. Barakat, supra , citing La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. White · filed 2008-03-11

Based on our review of the testimony, and considering all of the evidence in a light most favorable to the state, we find that the jury reasonably rejected the hypothesis of innocence advanced by the defendant. No other reasonable hypothesis of innocence was presented.

Section 15:438 requires a conviction based on circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Robbins · filed 2008-03-19

A conviction based upon circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... From the facts established by the direct evidence and inferred from the circumstantial evidence presented by the state, the trial court could have reasonably rejected Shaw's claim that Robbins knew nothing of the marijuana.

Section 15:438 requires the fact finder to be satisfied that the overall circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Turnage · filed 2008-03-26

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the fact finder must be satisfied the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... After reviewing the record, we find the evidence supports the jury's verdict. Moreover, we find the State sufficiently negated defendant's theory of self-defense.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State v. Parry · filed 2008-03-26

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 mandates that assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Under the circumstances here, we find the trial court reasonably rejected the hypothesis of innocence presented by the defense.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Jackson · filed 2008-03-26

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." ... On this record, the jury could reasonably conclude that Jackson's fingerprints were on the Kia because he was one of the people who took it from Thompson at gunpoint, and that no reasonable hypothesis of innocence could be inferred from the evidence.

When a conviction rests on circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Presson · filed 2008-06-04

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The only reasonable hypothesis is that defendant was already intoxicated when he drove out of the WK parking lot. Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier of fact could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence had been excluded.

Section 15:438 requires the trier of fact to find that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when analyzing circumstantial evidence.

State v. Calvert · filed 2008-06-06

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the trier of fact must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find that the evidence in the record sufficiently supports the convictions.

Section 15:438 requires the trier of fact to find that the overall circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. TROQUILLE · filed 2008-06-06

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the trier of fact must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find that the evidence in the record sufficiently supports the convictions.

Section 15:438 requires the trier of fact to be satisfied that the overall circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Mosely · filed 2008-06-06

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the trier of fact must be satisfied the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Moreover, we find that the State sufficiently negated defendant's alternate but contradictory hypotheses of innocence that he found the stolen items, or that Noel stole the items and gave them to him.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State v. Nix · filed 2008-06-18

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” ... Even though the evidence was circumstantial, viewing it in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant was the person who stabbed MeGlothen to death.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State v. Morris · filed 2008-09-17

Where circumstantial evidence is used to prove execution of the offense, assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, every reasonable hypothesis of innocence must be excluded to convict. La. R.S. 15:438; State v. Cummings, [95-1132 (La.2/28/96), 668 So.2d 1132]. This evidentiary rule restrains the factfinder in the first instance, and the reviewer on appeal, to accept as proven all that the evidence tends to prove, and then to convict only if every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and guides appellate review under the reasonable-doubt standard.

State v. Conner · filed 2008-10-01

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, supra , but rather an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires the trier of fact to find that circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before convicting.

State v. Daigle · filed 2008-10-31

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that, in order to convict, the trier of fact must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Next, the State presented circumstantial evidence that ruled out any other reasonable hypothesis of innocence proving the defendant intended to commit a felony or theft therein.

Section 15:438 requires the trier of fact to find that circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Hotard · filed 2008-10-31

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the trier of fact must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Thus, the jury was reasonable in rejecting the hypothesis of innocence that the defendant was unaware of the presence of the hydromorphone.

Section 15:438 requires the evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction based on circumstantial evidence.

State v. Dickinson · filed 2008-11-03

After a thorough review of the record, we are convinced the evidence presented in this case, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, all of the elements of vehicular homicide and the defendant’s identity as the perpetrator of that offense against the victim.

Section 15:438 requires a conviction based on circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Speed · filed 2009-01-14

A conviction based upon circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... As noted above, the facts clearly indicate, to the exclusion of any reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that Speed intended to inflict serious bodily injury upon Johnson through the act of throwing hot grease upon her person.

Section 15:438 requires the fact finder to determine whether the overall circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Landry · filed 2009-02-13

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the fact finder must be satisfied the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... We are convinced that viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, any rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that the defendant was guilty of attempted second degree murder.

Section 15:438 requires the fact finder to be satisfied that the overall circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Brunet · filed 2009-02-13

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides the fact finder must be satisfied the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guideline for reviewing whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Vincent · filed 2009-03-18

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, but rather is an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and guides appellate review under the reasonable doubt standard.

State v. Brown · filed 2009-03-18

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, but rather an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and guides appellate review of whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Fields · filed 2009-04-15

When a conviction is based upon circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, but rather is an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guideline for reviewing whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Riley · filed 2009-04-24

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, but rather is an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires the fact finder to be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when analyzing circumstantial evidence.

State v. Landry · filed 2009-05-08

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the fact finder must be satisfied the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

When a conviction rests on circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Black · filed 2009-05-13

When the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... However, Black’s own statement to the detective fully disproves his trial testimony.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guideline for reviewing whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Holland · filed 2009-05-20

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, but rather is an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before a conviction.

State v. Mims · filed 2009-06-03

"The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." La.R.S. 15:438. ... Although Defendant claimed Christopher had hit the front or side of his head on the bathtub, the most severe injuries were to the back of Christopher's head, and those injuries were inconsistent with a fall. ... Based on the evidence presented at trial, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier of fact could have found Defendant killed Christopher either by intentionally inflicting great bodily harm or while perpetrating cruelty to a juvenile. Accordingly, this assignment of error is without merit.

Section 15:438 requires the fact finder to be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when evaluating circumstantial evidence.

State v. Olden · filed 2009-06-12

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the fact finder must be satisfied the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State v. Cochran · filed 2009-06-23

The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... The lack of direct, physical evidence notwithstanding, the State presented circumstantial sufficient evidence to prove that Cochran was the person who killed Corcel-ler.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State, in the Interest of Kjc · filed 2009-09-11

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that, assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Any rational trier of fact, viewing the evidence concerning count II in the light most favorable to the State, could have found, proven beyond a reasonable doubt and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, the essential elements of simple burglary of an inhabited dwelling and K.J.C's identity as a perpetrator of that offense.

Section 15:438 requires the evidence in a circumstantial-evidence case to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State v. Claiborne · filed 2009-09-11

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that in order to convict, the trier of fact must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... The jury's conclusion that the items were taken by defendant and his accomplice, who were unauthorized to be in the building and were photographed wearing gloves (from which the jury could reasonably infer a desire to prohibit leaving fingerprints) reasonably excludes the possibility that the items were taken by the Friday evening cleaning crew.

Section 15:438 requires the trier of fact to find that the overall circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. McKemie · filed 2009-09-11

When analyzing circumstantial evidence. La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the trier of fact must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... The jury was reasonable in rejecting the defendant's hypothesis of innocence. After a thorough review of the record, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, we are convinced that any rational trier of fact could have found that the evidence, to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, was sufficient to prove all of the elements of aggravated rape.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State v. Thompson · filed 2009-09-29

The rule as to circumstantial evidence is that, “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. ... We find that a rational trier of fact, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty of possession of cocaine and that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence was excluded.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Thurman · filed 2009-10-07

The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Accordingly, we conclude that the evidence is not sufficient to find that Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol at the time his vehicle left the roadway.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence used to sustain a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Wilson · filed 2009-10-28

This section provides that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” ... Here the owner testified that a window in the locked vehicle had been broken out, that the vehicle had been rifled, and that items had been displaced.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Greene · filed 2009-11-12

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, the totality of such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... We do not find that the State's circumstantial evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires the fact finder to be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when assessing circumstantial evidence.

State v. Constance · filed 2009-11-18

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the fact finder must be satisfied the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... After a thorough review of the record, we are convinced that viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, any rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that the defendant was guilty of the aggravated rape of J.F.

Section 15:438 requires a conviction based on circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Linnear · filed 2009-12-09

A conviction based upon circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... Rather, the jury found that the strength of circumstantial evidence provided a direct link between Linnear's admitted acts and Fuggins' injuries and excluded all hypotheses set forth by the defense.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and guides appellate review of whether the evidence is sufficient to convict.

State v. Lewis · filed 2009-12-16

With circumstantial evidence the rule is: “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. This rule is not a separate test from the review standard established by Jackson v. Virginia, but rather it is an ^evidentiary guideline which facilitates appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming the facts the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Johnson · filed 2010-02-10

As to circumstantial evidence, the rule is that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. ... Based on the evidence presented at trial, it was not unreasonable for the jury to decide that the state proved that Mr. Johnson was guilty of attempted second-degree murder.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Dykes · filed 2010-02-12

In conducting this review, we also must be expressly mindful of Louisiana's circumstantial evidence test, which states in part, "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove," every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. ... After a thorough review of the record, we are convinced that a rational trier of fact, viewing the evidence presented in this case in the light most favorable to the State, could find that the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, all of the elements of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, aggravated flight from an officer, and the defendant's identity as the perpetrator of those offenses.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before it can support a conviction.

State v. Gipson · filed 2010-04-14

La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... These factors show that the defendant was in constructive possession of the illegal narcotics. A rational jury could have found the elements of these crimes proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence in this case upon which to base the defendant’s convictions.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction, assuming the facts the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Dixon · filed 2010-05-05

The statutory rule in evaluating the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence is, "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." La.R.S. 15:438. ... Thus, this court finds that a rational trier of fact could have found the likelihood of all of the factors coexisting eliminated all other reasonable hypotheses of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence proving an offense to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Drake · filed 2010-05-19

Where the offense is proved by circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence used to convict to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Knight · filed 2010-05-19

When circumstantial evidence is used to convict, the statutory rule is that, assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Givens · filed 2010-06-09

Wdien the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires a conviction based on circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Mitchell · filed 2010-08-11

In all cases where an essential element of the crime is not proven by direct evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 applies. As an evi-dentiary rule, it restrains the fact finder in the first instance, as well as the reviewer on appeal, to accept as proven all that the evidence tends to prove and then to convict only if every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. ... However, other than Mitchell’s mention of the fact that he had a roommate, there is nothing to indicate that this person had access to the vehicle and/or had previously been associated with the vehicle.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Hall · filed 2010-08-11

When a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... It was also reasonable for the jury to have disbelieved Hall’s version of events and reasonably reject the hypothesis of innocence presented by his testimony.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Blackson · filed 2010-08-11

When the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when an essential element is not proven by direct evidence.

State v. Lawrence · filed 2010-08-25

In cases in which an essential element of the crime is not proven by direct evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 applies. R.S. 15:438 states the rule as to circumstantial evidence: “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” ... After examining Mr. Lawrence’s argument, we find that the evidence is inconsistent with his theory of innocence, and a reasonable factfinder could have found him guilty — on every element, including his identity as the perpetrator — of this crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Burns · filed 2010-09-22

When the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. The appellate court reviews the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and determines whether an alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. ... The defendant asserts that the state failed to eliminate the hypothesis that he was unaware he had run over his wife. ... The evidence presented by the state in this case was sufficient to prove Burns’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to a rational jury.

Circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; an admission corroborated by the victim’s identification can satisfy that requirement.

State of Louisiana v. Washington · filed 2010-10-06

Thus, Defendant’s admission and the victim’s identification of the shoes leave no room for a reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Painich · filed 2010-11-03

When a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The defendant offered no reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Sarpy · filed 2010-12-08

Additionally, where circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove.” La. R.S. 15:438; ... Our review of the record shows that there was no evidence presented to suggest that someone else wore the do-rag after the defendant had done so, that Tyler touched the do-rag, or that somehow the defendant’s DNA was transferred to the do-rag.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Materre · filed 2010-12-08

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Huntley · filed 2011-01-25

The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La.R.S. 15:438. ... Having reviewed the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find that a rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the state proved that Mr. Huntley knowingly and intentionally possessed the drug and that he did so with the specific intent to distribute it.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Brown · filed 2011-01-26

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Baker · filed 2011-03-02

When the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before a conviction.

State v. Hayes · filed 2011-05-24

Where circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La.R.S. 15:438 mandates that: “Assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” ... We find that jurors did not unreasonably or irrationally reject the defense’s construction of the evening’s events.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State v. Jacobs · filed 2011-05-24

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that “ ‘assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.’ ”

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence as part of the reasonable-doubt inquiry.

State v. Nicholas · filed 2011-05-24

The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... However, this requirement does not establish a standard that is separate from the Jackson standard, but instead provides a helpful methodology for determining the existence of reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Williams · filed 2011-06-01

The circumstantial evidence rule is: “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La.R.S. 15:438. ... In the current case, we find that the State met its burden of proof and that the finder of fact rejected Defendant’s hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, including a reasonable possibility that another person with access took the missing funds.

State of Louisiana v. Latonya Michell Young · filed 2011-06-01

Although it is implicit in the reasons for ruling, the trial court did not address whether the state overcame every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, i.e., the access others had to the missing funds.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Alvarez · filed 2011-06-29

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis of a conviction, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that the elements of the offense be proven so that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. ... Alvarez’s theory of “possible” molestation by an unnamed person does not present another reasonable hypothesis.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Trahan · filed 2011-07-06

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La.R.S. 15:438. ... We find that, when evaluating the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the possibility that the shooting was accidental is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis of a conviction, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Henry · filed 2011-08-10

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Washington · filed 2011-08-17

This case is based on circumstantial evidence. The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to be proved, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of. innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before it can support a conviction.

State v. Pierce · filed 2011-08-31

And “when a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude only every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Moore, 11-0025, p. 13 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/7/11), 75 So.3d 22, 28. See also La. R.S. 15:438 (“assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.”); State v. Camp, 446 So.2d 1207 (La.1984).

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Moore · filed 2011-09-07

When a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude only every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. LeBlanc · filed 2011-09-30

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State v. Davillier · filed 2011-11-02

The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The argument that someone other than the defendant shot Dorsey’s car is not a reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

When a conviction rests on circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Jerry H. Credeur, Jr. · filed 2011-11-23

Defendant‘s conviction is based largely on circumstantial evidence and the State failed to exclude the reasonable hypotheses that Defendant was purchasing or had purchased and smoked the drug.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; on appeal, the court asks whether an alternative hypothesis is reasonable enough to prevent a rational juror from finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Hernandez-Zuniga · filed 2011-12-13

“The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. The reviewing court is not required to determine whether another possible hypothesis of innocence suggested by the defendant offers an exculpatory explanation of events. Rather, the reviewing court must determine whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Jones · filed 2011-12-14

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The suggestion that somebody else might have intervened in this sordid sequence of events and shot Lioy is simply not sufficiently reasonable to dissuade a reasonable jury from its finding of Jones’s guilt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence used to prove an essential element to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Banks · filed 2012-01-25

When the state relies on circumstantial evidence to establish the existence of an essential element of a crime, the court must assume every fact that the evidence tends to prove and the circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438; State v. Lilly, supra.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Washington · filed 2012-02-01

When the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence without imposing a stricter standard of review than Jackson v. Virginia.

State v. Bennett · filed 2012-02-29

When circumstantial evidence is used to convict, the statutory rule is that assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. The circumstantial evidence rule does not establish a stricter standard of review than Jackson v. Virginia, but it emphasizes the need for careful observance of the usual standard and provides a helpful methodology for its implementation in cases which hinge on the evaluation of circumstantial evidence.

When a conviction rests on circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Campbell · filed 2012-03-14

When the conviction is based on | ¡^circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... Likewise, photographs showing that Hunter was burned on both arms belie Campbell’s claim that she burned herself.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and provides a method for assessing reasonable doubt under the Jackson standard.

State v. Turner · filed 2012-03-27

“The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. However, this requirement does not establish a standard that is separate from the Jackson standard, but instead provides a helpful methodology for determining the existence of reasonable doubt.

Circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State v. Swanzy · filed 2012-05-08

The rule as to circumstantial evidence is “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence ténds to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. On appeal, the reviewing court does not determine if another possible hypothesis suggested by the defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events. Instead, the appellate court must evaluate the evidence in a light most favorable to the State and determine whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence as part of the general sufficiency standard, rather than as a separate test.

State v. Favorite · filed 2012-05-31

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” This is not a separate test to be applied when circumstantial evidence forms the basis of a conviction; all evidence, both direct and circumstantial, must be sufficient to satisfy a rational juror that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State v. Armstead · filed 2012-07-25

In evaluating a claim of insufficiency of evidence based on circumstantial evidence, the Supreme Court has indicated that La. R.S. 15:438 requires that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.’ ... Based on the foregoing, and viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, the evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find appellant guilty of forcible rape.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and guides appellate review of whether the evidence supports a conviction.

State v. Smith · filed 2012-10-03

Pursuant to La. R.S. 15:438, the elements of the crime must be proved so that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guideline for reviewing whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. McNair · filed 2012-12-28

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, supra, but rather an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

When a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Blackson · filed 2013-01-16

When a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guideline within the reasonable doubt sufficiency review.

State v. Johnson · filed 2013-02-07

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, but rather an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; this rule guides review of whether a rational juror could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Clements · filed 2013-03-13

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, supra, but rather an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires a jury considering circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before convicting.

State v. Vedol · filed 2013-03-13

In cases such as this which involve circumstantial evidence, the trial court must instruct the jury that, “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. This Court is not required to determine whether another possible hypothesis of innocence suggested by the defendant offers an exculpatory explanation of events. Rather, this Court must determine whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

When a conviction rests on circumstantial evidence, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Jackson · filed 2013-04-10

When a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... These facts satisfy the element of identity, proving that Jackson committed the crime, not some other person (such as Stringfellow) who might have skillfully planted Jackson’s shoeprint and stashed the coins in such as way as to mislead officers.

Section 15:438 requires a jury instruction that circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; on review, an alternative hypothesis matters if it would prevent a rational juror from finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Alexander · filed 2013-05-16

In cases involving circumstantial evidence, the trial court must instruct the jury that, “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. The reviewing court is not required to determine whether another possible hypothesis of innocence suggested by the defendant offers an exculpatory explanation of events. Rather, the reviewing court must determine whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires a conviction based on circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Stephens · filed 2013-05-29

A conviction based upon circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... Considering these collateral facts and circumstances proven by the state, we find that the circumstantial evidence of Stephens’ actual possession and knowledge of the drugs, including methamphetamine and Lortab, was established beyond a reasonable doubt.

When the State relies on circumstantial evidence to convict, it must prove the elements so that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded.

State v. Kenny · filed 2013-05-29

Where the State relies on circumstantial evidence as the basis of the conviction, such evidence must consist of proof of collateral facts and circumstances from which the existence of the main fact may be inferred according to reason and common experience. The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438; Huckabay, 809 So.2d at 1111. ... We find that the State failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Mr. Kenny’s intoxication was the cause of the victim’s death.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; a speculative alternative need not be excluded.

State of Louisiana v. Sillmon · filed 2013-06-05

As for Defendant’s argument that Billy Sillmon, the registered owner of the car, could have been the true gunman and could have escaped or hidden, we conclude that the facts already recited make such a scenario highly unlikely. Coupled with the testimony that deputies thoroughly searched the area, those facts render Defendant’s hypothesis unreasonable.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Santos-Castro · filed 2013-07-31

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence used to convict to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Caliste · filed 2013-09-04

“When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 requires that ‘assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.’ ” ... Mr. Caliste’s assertion that the physical evidence exonerates him because no weapon was found and no GSR was found on his hands is without merit. The jury could reasonably infer that Mr. Cal-iste disposed of the weapon once he ran behind the floodwall, as he was observed by law officers going behind the floodwall with the weapon in his hands.

A reasonable explanation for missing evidence does not defeat a conviction when it does not negate the offense.

State of Louisiana v. Jones · filed 2013-10-09

However, this is not a case in which the reasonable hypothesis that the keys were simply lost during the struggle negates the crime of attempted armed robbery.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Thompson · filed 2013-10-09

We find the circumstantial evidence presented excluded every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Robyn B. Little Davis · filed 2013-10-23

“When circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” Id. (citing La.R.S. 15:438).

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Hamdan · filed 2013-12-11

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. ... Moreover, based upon the telephone conversation between Bazel Hamdan and the defendant, Mr. Hamdan’s argument that the gun was a toy or an imitation is implausible.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guideline for reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence.

State v. Laneheart · filed 2014-02-26

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, supra, but rather an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence as part of the review for sufficient evidence.

State v. Scott · filed 2014-02-26

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to be excluded before a conviction may rest on circumstantial evidence.

State v. Lavy · filed 2014-03-11

In conducting this review, we also must be expressly mindful of Louisiana’s circumstantial evidence test, which states in part, “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove,” in order to convict, every reasonable hypothesis of innocence must be excluded.

Section 15:438 requires the fact finder to be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when evaluating circumstantial evidence.

State v. Gregoire · filed 2014-03-21

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the fact finder must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires the fact finder to be satisfied that the overall circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Magee · filed 2014-03-24

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the fact finder must be satisfied the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... We are convinced that viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, any rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that the defendant was guilty.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; on review, an alternative hypothesis must be reasonable enough to prevent a rational juror from finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Henry · filed 2014-03-26

“The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. The reviewing court is not required to determine whether another possible hypothesis of innocence suggested by the defendant offers an exculpatory explanation of events. Rather, the reviewing court must determine whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; on appeal, the court evaluates an alternative hypothesis in the light most favorable to the State.

State v. Turner · filed 2014-03-26

“The rule as to circumstantial evidence is: assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. On appeal, the reviewing court is not required to determine whether another possible hypothesis of innocence suggested by the defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events. ... Rather, the reviewing court must evaluate the evidence in a light most favorable to the State and determine whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; an alternative hypothesis defeats a conviction only if it is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Vargas · filed 2014-03-26

“The rule as to circumstantial evidence is; assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. The reviewing court is not required to determine whether another possible hypothesis of innocence suggested by the defendant offers an exculpatory explanation of events. Rather, the reviewing court must determine whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Robertson · filed 2014-04-02

Further, when the conviction is based upon circumstantial evidence, La.R.S. 15:438 provides that such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... However, the State failed to eliminate beyond a reasonable doubt the very real possibility that the victim was already deceased when the burglary commenced.

Section 15:438 requires evidence in a case resting essentially on circumstantial proof to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Broome · filed 2014-04-09

For a case resting essentially upon circumstantial evidence, that evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Haynes · filed 2014-05-07

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State of Louisiana v. Dickerson · filed 2014-06-04

Where the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, in order to convict, “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La.R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; the rule guides review of whether a rational juror could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Hatfield · filed 2014-07-02

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, supra, but rather an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Hamed · filed 2014-08-13

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. ... Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the defendant was merely an agent, who was directed to write checks without knowledge of the status of the account.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State v. Zeno · filed 2014-09-19

A thorough review of the record indicates that any rational trier of fact, viewing the evidence presented in this case in the light most favorable to the State, could find that the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, all of the elements of a felon in possession of a firearm, illegal carrying of a weapon while in possession of a controlled dangerous substance, and the defendant’s identity as the perpetrator of the crimes.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence used to prove an offense to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Melancon · filed 2014-09-24

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.”