La. Stat. Ann. § 15:438

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

State v. Williams · filed 2003-04-08

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." ... Thus, we find that the circumstantial evidence at trial was sufficient to prove, under the Jackson criteria, the "unmarried" element of the charged offense.

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

State v. Francois · filed 2003-04-09

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction, the totality of the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The detectives' testimony regarding the packaging of the heroin thus did not exclude the reasonable inference that they were packaging it for personal consumption.

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

State v. Gilliam · filed 2003-04-09

Even without the defendant’s multiple confessions, the circumstantial evidence — viewed in the light most favorable to the state-excludes every reasonable hypothesis of the defendant’s innocence.

Circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; this rule is part of the ordinary reasonable-doubt standard.

State v. Holloway · filed 2003-05-16

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. The court does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by the defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events; rather, when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the court determines whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt under Jackson v. Virginia. State v. Mackens, supra. This is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia.

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

State v. Finch · filed 2003-07-23

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. La. R.S. 15:438 is not a separate test from Jackson, but rather is an evidentiary guideline to facilitate appellate review of whether a rational juror |4could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State v. Tumblin · filed 2003-09-17

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

Section 15:438 requires the evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guide to appellate review of whether the evidence was sufficient to convict.

State v. Harris · filed 2003-10-01

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. La. R.S. 15:438 is not a separate test from Jackson, 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 as part of the reasonable doubt analysis.

State v. Evans · filed 2003-12-09

"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. 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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when used to prove guilt.

State v. Robicheaux · filed 2003-12-30

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." This statutory test works with the Jackson constitutional sufficiency test to evaluate whether all evidence, direct and circumstantial, is sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to a rational jury.

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. Gibbs · filed 2003-12-30

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 hypotheses of innocence." The requirement of La. R.S. 15:438 does not establish a standard separate from the Jackson standard, but rather provides a helpful methodology for determining the existence of reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and helps courts assess reasonable doubt.

State v. Hartwell · filed 2004-01-27

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. 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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guideline for reviewing sufficiency, not a separate test.

State v. Ford · filed 2004-02-18

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. La. R.S. 15:438 is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), 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 of an essential element to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State v. Van Sales · filed 2004-03-03

In all cases where an essential element of the crime is not proven by direct evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 applies. As an evidentiary rule, the statute 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. ... After evaluating the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find sufficient circumstantial evidence to support the jury's inference that Defendant had the requisite specific intent for a conviction of second degree murder.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when assessed for proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

State of Louisiana v. Merritt · filed 2004-03-17

In sum, we find the circumstantial evidence, together with the direct evidence of the injuries and the time periods over which the injuries occurred, evaluated in the light most favorable to the prosecution, established Defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Defendant’s hypothesis that the child injured herself in each case was not sufficiently strong such that a reasonable 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 and guides appellate review under the reasonable doubt standard.

State v. Vance · filed 2004-06-30

La. R.S. 15:438 is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979), 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.

When a conviction rests on circumstantial evidence, § 15:438 requires the evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Nolan · filed 2004-09-29

Moreover, as in the instant matter, when circumstantial evidence provides the basis for the conviction, La. R.S. 15:438 dictates that such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Circumstantial evidence can support a conviction only if it excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Jefferson W. Gill · filed 2004-10-13

For circumstantial evidence to convict, “it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.”7 ... Looking at this evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, this strong circumstantial evidence negates any reasonable claim by Gill that the victim was driving when the accident occurred.

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

State v. Ingram · filed 2004-10-26

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." ... After our review, we find that viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, the State excluded "every reasonable hypothesis of innocence" and that that a rational trier of fact could have found that the State proved the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State v. Jones · filed 2004-12-15

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 guides the reasonable-doubt inquiry under the Jackson standard.

State v. Austin · filed 2005-03-01

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. 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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, but does not impose a stricter standard of appellate review than reasonable doubt.

State of Louisiana v. Dotson · filed 2005-03-02

However, La.R.S. 15:438 does not establish a stricter standard of review on appeal than the rational juror’s reasonable doubt standard. The statute serves as a guide for the jury when considering circumstantial evidence. On appeal, the issue is whether a rational trier of fact, when viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, could find that all reasonable hypotheses of innocence were excluded.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, but does not impose a stricter standard of review than reasonable doubt.

State of Louisiana v. Turner · filed 2005-03-02

Further, when the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, La.R.S. 15:438 sets forth the rule that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, [the circumstantial evidence] must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” However, the Louisiana Supreme Court has held that La.R.S.15:438 does not establish a stricter standard of review than the rational juror’s reasonable doubt formula, which is considered more general in nature. ... The defendant offered some evidence to support his argument that the drugs found in his car did not belong to him; however, the jury’s verdict of guilty reflects a rejection of the defendant’s hypothesis of innocence. Given the evidence in the record, we conclude that this rejection was reasonable, as was the jury’s determination of guilty.

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

State v. Hopkins · filed 2005-03-02

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." ... A rational jury could easily accept this direct and circumstantial evidence over Hopkins's incredible claim that he was nowhere near Panola Pepper when the burglary and arson occurred.

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

State v. Clark · filed 2005-05-18

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The jury could infer that this unidentified person from whom defendant acquired the drugs was not a medical practitioner or someone authorized to dispense the drugs.

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. Coleman · filed 2005-05-20

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. ... After viewing the totality of the evidence presented in a light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier of fact could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that the evidence presented by the State was sufficient to find the defendant guilty as a principal to the second degree kidnapping of the victim.

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

State v. Turner · filed 2005-05-31

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, to convict it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. [2] However, this requirement of La R.S. 15:438 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 and provides a method for assessing reasonable doubt under the Jackson standard.

State v. Couvillion · filed 2005-07-26

However, La. R.S. 15:438 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 before conviction.

State v. Lewis · filed 2005-10-06

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." A different test is applied on appellate review.

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

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

Where an essential element of a crime is sought to be proven by circumstantial evidence, “it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La.R.S. 15:438. ... The jury could have reasonably inferred from the evidence that the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant was the robber.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; appellate courts use a different test when reviewing a conviction.

State v. Hooker · filed 2006-01-17

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." A different test is applied on appellate review.

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

State v. Scott · filed 2006-01-19

Additionally, when circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, the evidence, "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove . . . must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence." La. R.S. 15:438; see State v. Jacobs, 504 So.2d 817, 820 (La.1987) (all direct and circumstantial evidence must meet the Jackson test); State v. Porretto, 468 So.2d 1142, 1146 (La.1985) (La. R.S. 15:438 serves as an evidentiary guide for the jury when considering circumstantial evidence).

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

State v. Polizzi · filed 2006-02-14

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. 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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guide to reasonable doubt under the Jackson standard.

State v. Williams · filed 2006-03-14

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. 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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; it guides review under the reasonable doubt standard rather than creating a separate test.

State v. Cuccia · filed 2006-03-15

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, but does not impose a stricter standard of appellate review than reasonable doubt.

State v. Spears · filed 2006-04-04

However, La. R.S. 15:438 does not establish a stricter standard of review than the more general rational juror's reasonable doubt formula; rather it serves as a helpful evidentiary guide for jurors when evaluating circumstantial evidence.

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

State v. Robertson · filed 2006-04-12

Circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction in this case. Hence, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... He alleges that the state was unable to exclude the reasonable possibility that the victim's death resulted from an accidental shooting, which should have resulted in an acquittal. We disagree. ... The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, clearly supports a finding of an intentional homicide beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State v. Wright · filed 2006-05-19

Furthermore, the circumstantial evidence clearly excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438.

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

State of Louisiana v. Larry Surratt and Cynthia Anderson · filed 2006-06-07

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.

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

State v. Weary · filed 2006-06-23

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 supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence as part of the reasonable doubt inquiry.

State v. Schnyder · filed 2006-06-28

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.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and works with the constitutional sufficiency test to assess proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Leger · filed 2006-07-10

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 as part of the review for proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Templet · filed 2006-08-16

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 supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State v. LeBoeuf · filed 2006-09-15

In conducting this review, we also must be expressly mindful of Louisiana's circumstantial evidence test, which provides that for such evidence to support a conviction, assuming every fact proven that the evidence tends to prove, every reasonable hypothesis of innocence must be excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The trial court obviously concluded that the evidence presented herein excluded every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. The trial court further concluded that there was no evidence of manslaughter. We find that the record supports the trial court's conclusions.

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

State of Louisiana v. Roland Joseph Peltier, Jr. · filed 2006-09-27

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. La. R.S. 15:438 is not a separate test from Jackson v Virginia, supra, 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 supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Ronnie Kurt Hongo, Jr. · filed 2006-12-06

The statutory test of La. R.S. 15:438 “works with the Jackson constitutional sufficiency test to evaluate whether all evidence, direct and circumstantial, is sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to a rational jury.” ... In the present case, this court finds that the State failed to prove that the plastic bag found by Officer Jackson was the object which was thrown from the passenger window of Defendant’s car.

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

State of Louisiana v. Bryant · filed 2006-12-06

The use of circumstantial evidence is addressed in La.R.S. 15:438 which states, “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.” ... Considering the absence of evidence which suggests the possibility that another perpetrator committed the crime, the state adequately excluded the possibility a boyfriend or Ms. Gage’s husband committed the crime.

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

State v. Morris · filed 2006-12-13

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 the factfinder to be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when analyzing circumstantial evidence.

State v. Smith · filed 2006-12-28

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides the factfinder 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 guides appellate review of whether the evidence supports a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Dunbar · filed 2007-01-10

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. ... Viewing all of the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, it does not appear and we do not find that any rational trier of fact could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that Dunbar took or used a motor vehicle belonging to Patricia Abrams, thus rendering moot the issue of guilty knowledge and/or intent.

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

State v. Jenkins · filed 2007-01-24

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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State of Louisiana v. Singleton · filed 2007-03-14

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.” ... If Defendant had been an innocent party leaving the store after discovering Guillory’s crime, he would likely have been more interested in getting help for Mr. LeJeune, who was still alive and in getting away from Guillory, than in assisting Guillory in fleeing the crime scene.

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

State of Louisiana v. Lee · filed 2007-04-18

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, 2000-0674 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). ... Considering both the testimony of these officers and the quantity of the packages of drugs discovered in a light most favorable to the prosecution, we conclude that the trial court could have reasonably concluded that the evidence established that the defendant possessed the cocaine and marijuana with intent to distribute.

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

State v. Davis · filed 2007-04-25

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 supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Youngblood · filed 2007-05-09

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. The court does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by the defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events; rather, when evaluating the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the court determines whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt under Jackson.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, judged under the rational juror standard.

State v. Mosby · filed 2007-05-18

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. The court does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by the defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events; rather, when evaluating the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the court determines whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt under Jackson v. Virginia, supra .

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

State v. Franklin · filed 2007-06-14

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. The court does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by the defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events; rather, when evaluating the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the court determines whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt under Jackson v. Virginia.

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

State v. Harrell · filed 2007-08-01

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. ... Given the circumstances of the instant case, ample evidence was presented for the jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Harrell shot Ms. Anderson and specifically intended either to kill her or to inflict great bodily harm upon her.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence used to prove an offense to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; this rule helps assess reasonable doubt under Jackson rather than creating a separate test.

State v. London · filed 2007-11-27

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." ... 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 forming the basis of a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Alsandor · filed 2007-12-05

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, 2000-0674[,] 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 to support a conviction.

State v. Griffin · 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 and provides a method for assessing reasonable doubt under the Jackson standard.

State v. Arceneaux · filed 2008-03-25

Under La.R.S. 15:438, "[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." This requirement does not establish a standard separate from the Jackson standard, but provides a helpful methodology for determining the existence of reasonable doubt.

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

State of Louisiana v. Archie Louis Carter, Jr. · filed 2008-04-09

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, 2000-0674 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). ... Thus, the State had to prove, through circumstantial evidence, that the Defendant knew the syrup contained codeine. ... There is simply no evidence that the Defendant knowingly possessed codeine. Accordingly, the Defendant’s conviction for possession of codeine is reversed, and a judgment of not guilty is entered.

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

State v. Simmons · filed 2008-04-16

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 guides appellate review of whether a rational juror could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Forbs · filed 2008-04-23

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. ... We find that the circumstantial evidence in the matter before us provides sufficient support for the appellant’s bank fraud conviction.

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

State v. Frith · filed 2008-04-29

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; State v. Neal, 00-0674 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).

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

State v. Chatman · filed 2008-04-30

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

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

State v. Ruiz · filed 2008-06-06

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the factfinder 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 the crimes of distribution of methamphetamine and distribution of MDMA.

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

State v. Shaw · filed 2008-06-18

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, 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 reasonable doubt standard.

State v. Agee · filed 2008-07-23

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. ... Agee's argument in brief is that the evidence does not exclude the possibility that he simply picked up the watch somewhere outside the house and that he had not entered the house at any time. ... Agee was found on the scene of the crime; he was found in possession of property taken at the time of the crime. His subsequent flight indicates a consciousness of guilt from which the jury could reasonably conclude that he had entered the residence and taken the watch.

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

State v. Colbert · filed 2008-07-23

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.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, without imposing a stricter standard than reasonable doubt.

State v. Smith · filed 2008-08-13

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction, assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... Although the circumstantial evidence rule of La. R.S. 15:438 does not establish a stricter standard of review than the more general reasonable doubt formula, it emphasizes the need for careful observation of the usual standard, and provides a helpful methodology for its implementation in cases which hinge on the evaluation of circumstantial evidence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; courts apply that rule with the Jackson sufficiency test.

State v. Watson · filed 2008-08-19

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove a case, the trier of fact must, in order to obtain a conviction, and assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La.R.S. 15:438. This statutory test works with the Jackson sufficiency test to evaluate whether all evidence, direct or circumstantial, is sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to a rational trier of fact.

Section 15:438's rule that circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is part of the broader reasonable doubt standard.

State v. Durham · filed 2008-10-15

Defendant argues that his case is based solely upon circumstantial evidence and, as such, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. This statutory (not constitutional) rule, however, is simply a component part of the more comprehensive reasonable doubt standard. State v. Wright, 445 So.2d 1198 (1984). The single standard for appellate review is the standard established by Jackson.

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

State v. Jones · filed 2008-10-28

“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 these facts, we find that the evidence was based on proof sufficient for any rational trier of fact, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, to find the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, judged in light of whether a rational juror could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Collins · filed 2008-10-29

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. The court does not determine whether another possible hypothesis suggested by the defendant could afford an exculpatory explanation of the events; rather, when evaluating the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the court determines whether the possible alternative hypothesis is sufficiently reasonable that a rational juror could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt under Jackson v. Virginia.

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

State v. Baylor · filed 2008-11-26

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 the State to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when a conviction rests on circumstantial evidence.

State of Louisiana v. Savoy · filed 2008-12-10

Since there were no eyewitnesses to the fatal blow, Defendant’s conviction was based upon circumstantial evidence. Thus, the State was required to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La.R.S. 15:438.

A conviction based on circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. McGraw · filed 2008-12-10

A conviction based upon circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The jury obviously rejected the testimony which suggested that the pill was mistakenly placed in McGraw's car. Considering the inconsistencies in that defense witness's description of the pills, this rejection is reasonably supported by the record.

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

State v. Brown · filed 2008-12-17

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

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; prior threats and conduct can support an inference of intent.

State v. Brewer · filed 2008-12-30

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.” ... Given these circumstances, the jury could have found that the evidence circumstantially showed that the defendant entered the residence with the intent to commit a felony.

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

State v. McGee · filed 2009-02-13

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.

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

State v. Kirts · filed 2009-02-25

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 jury could have reasonably rejected Kirts's claim that he knew nothing about the cocaine or that it belonged to somebody else.

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

State of Louisiana v. Marilyn Roman Lively · filed 2009-05-06

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, 2000-0674 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 the reasonable doubt inquiry under the Jackson standard.

State v. Bauman · filed 2009-05-12

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. 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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State of Louisiana v. Tolliver · filed 2009-05-13

“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.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; that requirement operates with the constitutional sufficiency test.

State v. GRH · filed 2009-06-03

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). The statutory requirement of La. R.S. 15:438 "works with the Jackson constitutional sufficiency test to evaluate whether all evidence, direct and circumstantial, is sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to a rational jury."

Section 15:438 does not require an appellate court reviewing the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence to resolve conflicting inferences and rule out every hypothesis except guilt.

State v. SARRETT · filed 2009-08-19

Citing Louisiana’s circumstantial evidence rule, La. R.S. 15:438, defendant asks this reviewing court to examine conflicting inferences and rule out every hypothesis except that of guilty before affirming the verdict. Such a review, however, would usurp the role of the jury/judge and substitute our view of the facts.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, but does not impose a stricter standard of review than the Jackson standard.

State v. Robinson · filed 2009-08-19

Although La. R.S. 15:438 provides that when circumstantial evidence is used to convict, every reasonable hypothesis of innocence must be excluded, this statutory rule is not a separate test form the Jackson standard, supra and does not establish a stricter standard of review in circumstantial evidence cases. ... Thus, it is still the Jackson test that sets the standard for the reviewing court to determine whether there was insufficient circumstantial and direct evidence to affirm a conviction.

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

State v. Morris · filed 2009-09-11

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

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as an aid to the reasonable doubt inquiry, not a separate test.

State v. Barker · filed 2009-09-29

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that “assuming every fact to be proved that the [circumstantial] evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” ... It is not a separate test from the Jackson standard; rather it provides a helpful basis for determining the existence of reasonable doubt.

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

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

Furthermore, La.R.S. 15:438 provides: 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. ...Applying the Toups factors to the present case, and being mindful of the scope of review as explained by the supreme court in Majors, we find that reasonable fact finders could have inferred from the evidence presented that the defendant was aware of the presence of the cocaine and, therefore, in constructive possession thereof.

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. Griffin · filed 2009-10-23

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 distribution of cocaine.

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

State v. Wise · filed 2009-10-23

After a thorough review of the record in this case, we are convinced the evidence presented, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that defendant constructively possessed the cocaine found in Harris's vehicle.

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

State of Louisiana v. Joseph · filed 2009-11-04

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, 2000-0674 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). ... Review of pertinent jurisprudence leads us to conclude that possession of a digital scale and two rocks of crack cocaine weighing less than two grams, is insufficient to establish Defendant had the specific intent to distribute crack cocaine.

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

State of Louisiana v. Johnson · filed 2009-11-04

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. ... This evidence supports the State’s case and does not render the alternative theory that the driver acted alone so likely that a rational trier of fact could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State v. Scott · filed 2009-11-18

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.”

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

State v. Davidson · filed 2010-02-10

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.

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

State v. Panter · filed 2010-02-12

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 circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence as part of the overall sufficiency review.

State v. Spring · filed 2010-02-22

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides, "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 statutory test is not a purely separate one from the Jackson constitutional sufficiency standard. Ultimately, all evidence, both direct and circumstantial, must be sufficient under Jackson 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, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Trosclair · filed 2010-04-01

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 is excluded.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, as part of the overall sufficiency of evidence standard.

State v. Deluzain · filed 2010-05-07

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides, “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 statutory test is not a purely separate one from the Jackson constitutional sufficiency standard.

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

State of Louisiana v. Hunter · filed 2010-06-02

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.” ... Additionally, based on Harris, 597 So.2d 1105, which was cited by the second circuit in Douglas, 707 So.2d 512, the State failed to prove the Defendant constructively possessed the crack cocaine found under the chair, as Michael had been sitting in the chair and it was possible that either he or the Defendant placed the crack cocaine there.

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

State v. Watts · filed 2010-06-16

Additionally, when circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, the evidence, “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove ... must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438; see State v. Jacobs, 504 So.2d 817, 820 (La.1987) (all direct and circumstantial evidence must meet the Jackson v. Virginia test); State v. Porretto, 468 So.2d 1142, 1146 (La.1985) (La. R.S. 15:438 mandates that “all evidence both direct and circumstantial, must be sufficient under Jackson to satisfy a rational juror 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. Collins · filed 2010-06-28

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides, “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 trial testimony provides sufficient evidence from which a reasonable factfinder could have concluded beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that defendant fired the .25 caliber gun into the crowd and that he also was actively involved in the shootout.

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

State v. Law · filed 2010-08-11

After a thorough review of the record, and viewing the evidence presented in this case in the light most favorable to the state, a rational trier of fact could find that the state 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.

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

State v. Garner · filed 2010-08-18

When the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... When viewed in the light most favorable to the state, we find this evidence sufficient to convict Garner of the second degree murder of Chatman.

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

State v. Fernandez · filed 2010-10-06

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. ... Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, we find a reasonable juror could readily have concluded that the defendant was a principal to the robbery and kidnapping of Wendell Cousin.

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

State v. Dillard · filed 2010-11-03

When the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, 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 before it can support a conviction.

State v. Malone · filed 2010-12-15

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.

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

State v. Baulkman · filed 2011-01-26

For circumstantial evidence to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... We find this conclusion to be reasonable and, therefore, Baulkman’s assertions on appealare without merit.

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

State of Louisiana v. Romero · filed 2011-02-02

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. ... The circumstantial facts, the presence of Defendant’s girlfriend at the time of the taking, and Defendant later being seen driving the vehicle, provide the reasonable inference that Defendant was the person who took the vehicle.

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

State v. Wiley · filed 2011-04-26

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.” State v. Frith, 08-52, p. 9 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/29/08), 985 So.2d 792, 797, citing La. R.S. 15:438 and State v. Neal, 00-0674 (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 to support a conviction.

State v. Moore · filed 2011-05-18

In order to convict using circumstantial evidence, every reasonable hypothesis of innocence must be excluded. ... While there was no direct evidence from eyewitnesses linking Defendant to the murder, the circumstantial evidence adduced at trial excluded any reasonable hypothesis of Defendant’s innocence.

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

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

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. ... Though Defendant and Ms. Newhouse initially claimed the baby had either hit her head on the side of the bathtub or on the floor of the bathtub in a fall, the fatal injury could not have been derived from either of those scenarios as Gladys’ autopsy yielded no evidence that the injuries were sustained in a fall.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, but does not require the prosecution to rule out every possible innocent explanation.

State v. Adams · filed 2011-06-01

“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 (emphasis added). The prosecution, however, is not “under an affirmative duty to rule out every hypothesis except that of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

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

State v. Frith · filed 2011-08-10

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.”

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. Arvie · filed 2011-10-05

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.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence but does not impose a stricter standard of review than the rational juror reasonable doubt test.

State of Louisiana v. Bivens · filed 2011-10-05

Further, when the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, La.R.S. 15:438 sets forth the rule that “assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, [the circumstantial evidence] must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” However, La.R.S. 15:438 does not establish a stricter standard of review than the more general rational juror’s reasonable doubt formula; rather it serves as a helpful evidentiary guide for jurors when evaluating circumstantial evidence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence as a method for evaluating reasonable doubt under Jackson.

State v. Lobo · filed 2011-10-25

“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. This requirement of La.R.S. 15:438, however, 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, but its rule is a guideline for reviewing whether the evidence meets the reasonable doubt standard.

State v. Rubens · filed 2011-11-30

However, as noted above, the circumstantial evidence rule is not a separate test from Jackson v. Virginia, supra, 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 — all evidence, direct and circumstantial, must meet the Jackson reasonable doubt standard.

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

State v. Bryant · filed 2011-12-21

When a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... The foregoing facts, when viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, are sufficient for a rational finder of fact to conclude that Bryant committed simple burglary of the inhabited dwelling on Patton Avenue and exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

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

State v. Ott · filed 2012-01-05

Under those circumstances, the circumstantial evidence rule provided by 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.” ... Confronted with competing accounts of how the defendant’s DNA ended up in the victim’s bedroom, the jury chose to believe the State, and this Court is not in a position to second guess the jury’s conclusion.

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

State of Louisiana v. McCray · filed 2012-02-08

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. ... Lastly, the weight of the circumstantial evidence far exceeds the weight of Defendant’s self-serving testimony, the only evidence to suggest he may have committed the offense in the heat of blood or sudden passion.

When an essential element is not proven by direct evidence, Section 15:438 permits conviction only if every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded.

State v. Jefferson · filed 2012-03-07

In all cases where an essential element of the crime is not proven by direct evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 applies. As an evidentiary 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. Whether circumstantial evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence presents a question of law.

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

State v. Underdonk · filed 2012-03-23

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the factfinder 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 prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, defendant was guilty of attempted aggravated rape.

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

State of Louisiana v. M S · filed 2012-04-04

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. ... The circumstantial evidence in this case did not create a hypothesis of innocence, and the state met its burden of proof.

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

State v. Pettus · filed 2012-05-22

In summary, we find that the trial court properly excluded the tattoo evidence, and, further, that a rational trier of fact could have found the evidence presented by the State, although circumstantial, was sufficient to prove Pettus’ guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, excluding every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

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

State ex rel. J.W. · filed 2012-06-06

When a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, Louisiana Revised Statutes 15:438 provides that such evidence “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. Ennis · filed 2012-07-05

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.” ... Though the evidence against appellant was circumstantial, this court has affirmed convictions for burglary where the entry or attempted entry into the structure is proven solely through circumstantial evidence. ... In conclusion, the state provided sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that appellant was guilty of attempted unauthorized entry of an inhabited dwelling when viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution.

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

State v. Guess · filed 2012-08-08

Where an essential element of the crime is proven by circumstantial evidence rather than by direct evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 restrains the fact finder 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 applies when an essential element lacks direct proof and permits conviction only if the evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Tatum · filed 2012-08-15

In all cases where an essential element of the crime is not proven by direct evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 applies. As an evidentiary 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.

Section 15:438 requires a jury instruction that circumstantial evidence exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; on appeal, the question is whether an alternative hypothesis is so reasonable that a rational juror could not find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Christmas · filed 2012-09-11

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. Rogrick M. Van Dyke · filed 2012-10-03

Further, we find the evidence sufficient to support the jury’s conclusion that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence was excluded by the state’s evidence.

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

State v. Clark · filed 2012-10-03

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 mandates, “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 standard.

State v. Joyner · filed 2012-10-24

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 support a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Robinson · filed 2012-11-14

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 mandates, “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 upon the strong circumstantial evidence, which included the money trail, the discovery of the defendant in close proximity to items taken during the robbery and his codefendant’s hiding place, and the short period of time in which the events transpired, the jury could have reasonably concluded, to the exclusion of any other reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that the state had successfully negated any reasonable probability of mis-identification and that the defendant was one of the participants in the armed robbery.

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

State v. Sipp · filed 2012-11-28

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 and provides a method for assessing reasonable doubt, rather than a separate standard of review.

State v. Williams · filed 2012-12-11

“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.

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

State v. Bourgeois · filed 2013-02-15

However, we conclude that no rational trier of fact, viewing the evidence presented in this case in the light most favorable to the State, could find the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that the defendant “filed” the altered Act of Giving in Payment.

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. Brown · filed 2013-04-03

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. ... While at trial and in brief, Defendant attempted to pin the murders on Eric George and Kevin Melbert, the evidence indicated, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Defendant knew his parents were lying dead or dying each and every time he entered the house, to get the dryer and to locate the title of the car.

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

State v. Brown · filed 2013-04-10

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 the Jackson reasonable doubt standard; rather, it 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 the sufficiency of the evidence.

State v. Cleveland · filed 2013-04-10

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 and serves as a guide within the ordinary sufficiency standard.

State v. Watson · filed 2013-05-15

Further, when the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 states that "assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, [the circumstantial evidence] must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” However, La. R.S. 15:438 does not establish a stricter standard than Jackson v. Virginia, supra; rather, it serves as a helpful evidentiary guide for jurors in evaluating circumstantial evidence.

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

State v. Morgan · filed 2013-06-07

we also must be expressly mindful of Louisiana’s circumstantial evidence test, i.e., “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; the rule guides review of whether the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State v. Cooper · filed 2013-07-10

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 supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Peters · filed 2013-08-21

The elements must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The testimony of the deputies and NOPD officers negated any reasonable probability of the misidentification of Peters as one of the shooters who killed Mr. Dorsey.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and serves as a guide rather than a stricter standard of review.

State v. Lewis · filed 2013-09-25

La. R.S. 15:438 does not establish a stricter standard than Jackson v. Virginia, supra. Rather, it serves as a helpful evi-dentiary guide for jurors in evaluating circumstantial evidence.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence but does not impose a stricter appellate standard than the rational juror’s reasonable doubt standard.

State of Louisiana v. Kendrick M. Cox · filed 2013-10-09

However, La.R.S. 15:438 does not establish a stricter standard of review on appeal than the rational juror’s reasonable doubt standard. The statute serves as a guide for the jury when considering circumstantial evidence. On appeal, the issue is whether a rational trier of fact, when viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, could find that all reasonable hypotheses of innocence were excluded.

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

State of Louisiana v. Saltzman · 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 ex rel. C.M. · filed 2013-10-30

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.