La. Stat. Ann. § 15:438

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to prove the offense while excluding every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Banks · filed 2013-10-30

Moreover, 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. ... Based on this testimony, a rational trier of fact could find that defendant was in fact conscious and in control of her actions and her vehicle.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, while allowing jurors to draw reasonable inferences from the evidence.

State of Louisiana v. Williams · filed 2013-11-06

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. ... Further, reasonable inferences from the circumstantial evidence offered by the State are sufficient that a reasonable juror could conclude that, while still driving the borrowed car, the defendant failed to stop at a checkpoint in Jefferson Parish, lead the police on a chase and ultimately evaded capture by fleeing on foot.

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. Biddy · filed 2013-11-20

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 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; it guides appellate review rather than creating a separate sufficiency test.

State v. Pierce · filed 2013-12-10

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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; this requirement guides the reasonable-doubt inquiry rather than creating a separate test.

State v. Le · filed 2013-12-12

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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence before it can support a conviction.

State v. Cox · filed 2013-12-12

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 the State to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when proving a conviction with circumstantial evidence.

State v. Taylor · filed 2013-12-18

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 it can support a conviction.

State v. Scott · filed 2013-12-23

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.

When circumstantial evidence supports a conviction, the elements must be proved so that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded.

State v. Vessel · filed 2014-01-10

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

When the state relies on circumstantial evidence to prove an essential element of a crime, the court must assume every fact the evidence tends to prove, and the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Jones · filed 2014-01-22

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.

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

State v. German · filed 2014-01-22

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; that rule guides review under the reasonable doubt standard rather than creating a separate test.

State v. Nellum · filed 2014-02-12

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.

State of Louisiana v. Jose Luis Segura, Jr. · filed 2014-03-05

Thus, the issue before this court is whether the jury, while viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the State, could have found that all reasonable hypotheses of innocence were excluded. ... Even against Defendant’s testimony that he was not the shooter, there is enough evidence to support a verdict of second degree murder and the responsive verdict of manslaughter beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State v. Weathersby · filed 2014-04-16

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

Section 15:438 guides juries and appellate courts in evaluating circumstantial evidence but does not replace the rational-juror test for evidentiary sufficiency.

State v. Mack · filed 2014-05-07

Thus, the rule of La.R.S. 15:438 does not supplant Jackson’s objective test of evidentiary sufficiency from the point of view of a hypothetical rational trier of fact, although it does “provide[ ] an evidentiary guideline for the jury when considering circumstantial evidence and facilitates appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” Wright, 445 So.2d at 1201.

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

State v. Price · filed 2014-05-15

A conviction based upon circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The jury could have reasonably rejected any evidence that Coker’s shaking of the child in the minutes before he was taken to the hospital caused the brain swelling and resultant complications.

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

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

Furthermore, “[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.” La.R.S. 15:438. ... However, it is clear that the jury rejected all of this evidence, and we find no error in that rejection.

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

State in the Intrest of T. H. · filed 2014-06-04

[W]hen the conviction is based upon circumstantial evidence, La.R.S. 15:438 provides that such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. State v. Camp, 446 So.2d 1207 (La.1984); State v. Wright, 445 So.2d 1198 (La.1984). 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. ... The State‟s case is based upon circumstantial evidence. ... T. H.‟s adjudication is affirmed.

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

State v. Jasper · filed 2014-09-17

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

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

State of Louisiana v. Carl J. Webb, Jr. · filed 2014-10-01

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, such evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La.R.S. 15:438. ... Even though the specific guns charged in the bill of information were not ultimately found in Defendant’s possession, we nonetheless find sufficient circumstantial evidence that Defendant possessed the stolen guns.

When circumstantial evidence supports a conviction, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State ex rel. J.W. · filed 2014-10-29

Furthermore, when circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction, the applicable standard 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, the inference that J.W. broke into Ms. Chester’s home to steal her property is rational under these facts and should not be disturbed.

Section 15:438 requires the jury in a circumstantial evidence case to be instructed that the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Castillo · filed 2014-10-29

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.

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove an offense, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Flores · filed 2014-12-23

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.

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

State ex rel. M.J. · filed 2015-02-04

Where an adjudication is based on circumstantial |Revidence, such evidence “must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438; State ex. rel. C.B., 09-1114, p. 6, 28 So.3d at 528 (citing State v. Langford, 438 So.2d 979, 983 (La.1986)).

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

State v. Ellis · filed 2015-02-04

However, the Louisiana Supreme Court has clarified that the circumstantial evidence rule of La. R.S. 15:438 is “not a separate test” from' the Jackson v. Virginia standard, but rather that it “merely provides an evidentiary guideline for the jury when considering circumstantial evidence and facilitates -appellate review of whether a rational juror could have found defendant guilty beyond, a reasonable doubt.”

Circumstantial evidence supports a conviction only if, assuming every fact it tends to prove, it excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Stipe · filed 2015-02-11

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. ... Applying the legal principles to the evidence in this case, we find that a rational trier of fact could have found that the State carried its burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant acted with specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm.

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. Gorman · filed 2015-03-06

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the factfinder must be satisfied that the overall evidence excludes 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. Fontenot · filed 2015-03-18

While there was no one who said they actually saw Defendant pull the trigger, the circumstantial evidence was so overwhelming that the jury was able to find Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of second degree murder and attempted second degree murder.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; it is an evidentiary guideline within the reasonable doubt standard.

State v. Hartford · filed 2015-03-18

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 used to prove an essential element of a crime to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Green · filed 2015-04-15

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[inthe circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438.

Section 15:438 applies when an essential element lacks direct proof and requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Manning · filed 2015-04-15

Where an essential element of the crime is not proven by direct evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 applies. ... Additionally, ample circumstantial evidence established Manning’s intent to distribute the drugs.

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

State v. Woodberry · filed 2015-06-03

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 other reasonable hypothesis of innocence before conviction.

State v. Randle · filed 2015-06-24

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 other reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... From these circumstances, the jury could have reasonably inferred that it was after his unsuccessful attempt to gain entry into McDonald’s home that Moore enlisted the aid of the armed Randle for the purpose of gaining entry into the house with the specific intent to rob McDonald of money.

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

State v. Chatman · filed 2015-06-24

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

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove an offense, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Campbell · filed 2015-06-24

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 used to convict to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Gibson · filed 2015-07-06

In using circumstantial evidence to convict, 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 guides appellate review under the reasonable doubt standard.

State v. White · filed 2015-07-29

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, 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 before a conviction.

State v. Brown · filed 2015-09-15

In instances involving circuih-stantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 dictates 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.” Smith, 12-247 at 7, 106 So.3d at 1053.

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

State of Louisiana v. Kyle D. Hodde AKA - Kyle Daniel Hodde · filed 2015-11-04

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. ... Viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, we find the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State v. Johnson · filed 2015-12-09

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.

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

State of Louisiana v. Shupp · filed 2016-02-03

Considering the totality of the evidence and the circumstances in a light most favorable to the State, this court finds that the evidence proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that Defendant robbed the victim at gunpoint and falsely imprisoned her with the use of a dangerous weapon.

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

State v. Amos · filed 2016-04-06

In using circumstantial evidence to convict, 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 v. Virginia standard outline above; 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 supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Thibodeaux · filed 2016-04-13

“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. ... Additionally, accepting Mr. Newman‟s testimony as credible, the trier of fact could conclude that the state established beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was at the scene of the offenses when they occurred, that he was in the room when both Ms. Pryor and Ms. LeDoux were repeatedly stabbed, and that he left that room with the bloody knife in his hand.

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

State v. Clements · filed 2016-05-04

The elemesnts must be proven such that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded, See La. R.S. 15:438. . ... We find that ample circumstantial evidence exists of Mr. Clements’ involvement.

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

State v. Hickman · filed 2016-05-16

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 evidence was sufficient to infer from the circumstances that Defendant specifically intended to kill Victim and that she committed an overt act in furtherance of that goal.

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

State v. Wilson · filed 2016-05-18

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 before conviction.

State of Louisiana Versus Errol Victor, Sr. · filed 2016-05-26

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

State of Louisiana v. Baumberger · filed 2016-06-01

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 v. Scott · filed 2016-06-29

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”. ... The evidence presented was sufficient to infer from the circumstances that Mr. Scott specifically intended to kill Brandon.

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

State v. Caminita · filed 2016-09-16

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides [4that 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 theft of goods (valued between $500.00 and $ 1,500.00).

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

State v. Toliver · filed 2016-09-19

Any rational fact finder could have found beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that the defendant was guilty of armed robbery with a firearm.

Circumstantial evidence supports a conviction when it excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Gardner · filed 2016-09-19

The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the state, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, supports the trial court’s verdict that the defendant is guilty of manslaughter.

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

State v. Flowers · filed 2016-09-19

When analyzing circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that the factfinder 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 reasonable-doubt inquiry.

State v. Rose · filed 2016-09-28

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.” ... 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.

State v. Young · filed 2016-10-05

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.” ... Considering Det. Perez’s testimony as to the location of the weapon, the defendant’s proximity to the weapon and the events surrounding the discovery of the gun, as well as the documentary evidence in the apartment establishing dominion and control, a rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the State had met its burden of proving all the elements of the offense of possession of firearm by a convicted felon.

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

State of Louisiana v. Crawford · filed 2016-11-16

In cases such as this one, where the conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution’s case must “exclude[] every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” State v. Captville, 448 So.2d 676, 678 (La. 1984) (citing La. R.S. 15:438). ... Evaluating the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, giving deference to the jury’s obvious assessment of credibility and weighing of the evidence, and without substituting our own appreciation of the facts for that of the jury, this court finds that the alternative hypothesis of death by natural causes in this case is not 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 used to prove an essential element of a crime to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Odums · filed 2016-11-30

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.

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

State v. Farris · filed 2016-12-14

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. ... The remaining evidence, although circumstantial, was sufficient to establish the defendant as that perpetrator.

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

State v. Hoang · filed 2016-12-21

Where a conviction was based on circumstantial evidence, the evidence “must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La. R.S. 15:438. ... Unless that circumstantial evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact to be proved the evidence tended to prove, Defendant’s conviction cannot stand.

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

State v. Dunn · filed 2016-12-22

Any rational fact finder could have found beyond a reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, that the defendant was guilty of armed robbery with a firearm.

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

State v. Stock · filed 2017-02-22

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 the state to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence when a conviction rests on circumstantial evidence, but it does not impose a stricter standard of appellate review than reasonable doubt.

State of Louisiana v. Purvis · filed 2017-04-12

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.

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

State v. Becnel · filed 2017-04-20

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; Oliphant, 133 So.3d at 1258. ... Based upon the evidence, the jury could have reasonably concluded that the defendant had constructive possession of the computer, as well as knowledge, access, and control of the pornographic images of juveniles found thereon.

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

State v. Wilson · filed 2017-04-26

When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for 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; Oliphant, 133 So.3d at 1258.

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

State v. Green · filed 2017-05-03

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.

State v. Gary · filed 2017-05-03

In cases that are proven on circumstantial evidence, like this one, 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.”

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; a hypothesis reasonably rejected by the jury does not create reasonable doubt unless another reasonable hypothesis remains.

State v. Walker · filed 2017-05-17

When a case involves circumstantial evidence, and the jury reasonably rejects the hypothesis of innocence presented by the defendant’s own testimony, that hypothesis falls, and the defendant is guilty unless there is another hypothesis which raises a reasonable doubt.

When a criminal case rests essentially on circumstantial evidence, that evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Woods · filed 2017-08-09

If a case rests essentially upon circumstantial evidence, that evidence 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. Robinson · filed 2017-08-09

A conviction based upon circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... The facts and evidence exclude every other reasonable hypothesis of innocence, regardless of any evidence showing that minimal deposits were made on Robinson's day off or at any other time by other employees.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and guides the reasonable-doubt inquiry without creating a separate sufficiency test.

State v. Smith · filed 2017-08-30

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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; that rule does not reduce the deference owed to the factfinder on sufficiency review.

State of Louisiana v. Thompson · filed 2017-09-18

Of particular relevance to the present case is the fact that the deference demanded by Jackson is not affected when circumstantial evidence forms the basis of the conviction.

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

State v. Mingo · filed 2017-09-27

For a case resting essentially upon circumstantial evidence, that evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Viewing the evidence as a whole in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the jury could have reasonably found the elements of second degree murder were proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State v. Anderson · filed 2017-09-27

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.

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

State v. Lutz · filed 2017-11-01

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

State v. Leger · filed 2017-11-15

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 circumstantial evidence used to prove an essential element of a crime to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Stewart · filed 2017-11-15

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 ; ... In viewing the totality of the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, we opine that any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of aggravated flight from an officer proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State v. Banks · filed 2017-12-21

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 obscenity.

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. Vail · filed 2017-12-28

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.

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

State v. Cretian · filed 2018-01-24

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."

Circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence under the reasonable doubt standard.

State v. Raine · filed 2018-03-07

The elements must be proven such that "every reasonable hypothesis of innocence" is excluded. La. R.S. 15:438. ... The circumstantial evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the prosecution, demonstrates that a rational trier of fact could have found Ms. Raine guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, reasonably rejecting the hypotheses of innocence she advanced.

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

State of Louisiana v. Buteaux · filed 2018-03-14

Accordingly, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support an ultimate finding by the jury that the reasonable findings and inferences permitted by the evidence exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, and, therefore, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict of three counts of theft beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State v. Harrison · filed 2018-03-21

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." ... it was not unreasonable for the jury to conclude that the defendant shot the victim and robbed Ms. Hedgepeth while armed with a gun. This assignment is meritless.

Section 15:438 requires a court reviewing circumstantial evidence to assume every fact the evidence tends to prove and determine whether every reasonable hypothesis of innocence is excluded.

State v. Coleman · filed 2018-04-13

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.

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

State v. Hutsell · filed 2018-04-18

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

State v. Kitts · filed 2018-05-10

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.

State v. Sandifer · filed 2018-06-27

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

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

State v. Folse · filed 2018-09-21

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. ... Based on the verdict, the jury rejected the defendant's hypothesis of innocence that he did not complete the work because he was delayed in obtaining materials and/or due to circumstances out of his control.

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

State v. Livous · filed 2018-09-24

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."

When a case rests essentially on circumstantial evidence, that evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Brooks · filed 2018-09-26

If a case rests 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, but it does not impose a stricter appellate standard than reasonable doubt.

State of Louisiana v. Dotson · filed 2018-10-03

[W]hen the conviction is based upon circumstantial evidence, La.R.S. 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 and provides a method for assessing reasonable doubt under the Jackson standard.

State v. Devillier · filed 2018-10-17

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 a sufficiency review of circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, assuming every fact the evidence tends to prove.

State v. Lampley · filed 2018-11-02

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.

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

State v. Thompson · filed 2018-11-28

In instances involving circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 dictates 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."

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove an offense, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State v. Flag · filed 2018-12-19

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, 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."

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

State v. Blackwell · filed 2018-12-27

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."

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

State of Louisiana v. Garnett · filed 2019-01-23

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.

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

State of Louisiana v. Cohen · filed 2019-05-08

Pursuant to 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.”

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. Copeland · filed 2019-09-25

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. ... In this case, a review of the record reveals that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to support a jury finding Copeland guilty of armed robbery beyond a reasonable doubt.

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove an essential element of a crime, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Miller · filed 2019-11-20

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.

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. D. D. · filed 2019-12-27

In instances involving circumstantial evidence, La. R.S. 15:438 dictates 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 when no direct evidence proves an element of the offense.

State of Louisiana v. Varnado · filed 2020-01-29

But where no direct evidence is presented proving one or more of the elements of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 governs circumstantial evidence and states “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 it can support a conviction.

State of Louisiana in the Interest of M.B. . · filed 2020-02-12

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 Court, after reviewing all of the evidence presented, finds it sufficient to support the trial court’s conviction of illegal possession of a stolen firearm.

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

State of Louisiana v. Michael Calvin Duhon -Aka- Michael C. Duhon -Aka- Michael Duhon · filed 2020-04-01

Additionally, when a conviction is based on circumstantial evidence, the evidence “must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” La.R.S. 15:438.

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. Y. Morehead · filed 2020-04-22

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.

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

State of Louisiana v. Magrini · filed 2020-05-27

In regards to a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, “[La.] R.S. 15:438 sets forth the rule that, in order to convict, the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.”

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

State of Louisiana Versus Aaron Harrell · filed 2020-07-08

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, 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.”

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

State of Louisiana Versus Johnny Kelly · filed 2020-07-31

When circumstantial evidence is involved, the evidence must ... exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... Considering the law and the facts herein, we find that a rational trier of fact could have found the evidence was sufficient under the standard set forth in Jackson to support defendant’s conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; it provides a basis for assessing reasonable doubt, not a separate test.

State of Louisiana Versus Charles McQuarter, III · filed 2020-11-25

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, 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 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 as part of the overall sufficiency of the evidence review.

State of Louisiana Versus Jakorey Williams · filed 2020-12-30

The rule regarding circumstantial evidence, according to La. R.S. 15:438, 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.” ... Based on a review of the evidence presented at trial, we find the jury could have reasonably concluded that Defendant was guilty of second-degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence supporting a conviction to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; on appeal, the evidence is evaluated in the light most favorable to the State.

State of Louisiana Versus Brandon Cordell Martin A.K.A. "B" · filed 2021-04-28

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, 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 reviewing court is not required to determine whether defendant’s suggested hypothesis of innocence offers an exculpatory explanation of events. Rather, the reviewing court must evaluate the evidence in the 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. ... In light of the foregoing, we find that the evidence was constitutionally sufficient to support the jury’s finding that defendant had the specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm on the victim and that defendant did not act in self-defense.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; an alternative hypothesis matters if it is reasonable enough to prevent a rational factfinder from finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State of Louisiana Versus Alcus A. Smith A.K.A. "Bug" A.K.A. "Bull" · filed 2021-04-28

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of the offense, 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 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 trier of fact could not have found proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

When no direct evidence proves an element of the offense, circumstantial evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence to support a conviction.

State of Louisiana v. Washington · filed 2021-08-04

But where there is no direct evidence presented proving one or more of the elements of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 governs circumstantial evidence and 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.” ... In this case, the defendant put forth no reasonable hypothesis of innocence to counter the circumstantial evidence put forth by the State, which included the cell phone evidence placing the defendant at the scene of the shootings and the scene where the gold Accord was burned.

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

State of Louisiana in the Interest of S.C.. · filed 2021-11-29

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.” ... In contrast, S.C. put forth no reasonable hypothesis of innocence to counter any of the circumstantial evidence offered by the State; he merely proclaimed his innocence.

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

State of Louisiana v. Mealancon · filed 2021-12-22

But where there is no direct evidence presented proving one or more of the elements of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 governs circumstantial evidence and 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.”

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

State of Louisiana v. Benavides · filed 2022-03-09

As noted, where proof of a fact is based on circumstantial evidence, the evidence “must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence” in order to support the conviction. R.S. 15:438. ... Therefore, we conclude that, based on the totality of the circumstantial evidence and testimony, a jury could reasonably find that Randarious suffered serious bodily injury beyond a reasonable doubt.

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

State of Louisiana v. Gilliam · filed 2022-03-10

“[W]hen the State uses circumstantial evidence to prove the elements 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, there was no evidence that L.N. may have confused the event with another time or another person.

A conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Myrick · filed 2022-09-21

To convict a defendant based upon circumstantial evidence, every reasonable hypothesis of innocence must be excluded. ... Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find that the state presented sufficient evidence at trial for a reasonable jury to convict the defendant of simple burglary.

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

State of Louisiana Versus Maurice T. Leach AKA "marlo" · filed 2022-12-28

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. Id.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; on appeal, the court asks whether a rational juror could find that requirement satisfied.

State of Louisiana v. Tennessee · filed 2023-02-23

When viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, we conclude a rational trier of fact could find that all reasonable hypotheses of innocence were excluded.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; its rule helps determine whether reasonable doubt exists.

State of Louisiana Versus Long T. Nguyen · filed 2023-02-27

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.” Id. (citing 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 guides reasonable-doubt review under Jackson.

State of Louisiana Versus Ryk Frickey · filed 2023-03-01

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.” Id. (citing 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.

State of Louisiana v. Toby · filed 2023-03-08

The analysis of circumstantial evidence is governed by La.R.S. 15:438, providing 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.”

Section 15:438 guides juries evaluating circumstantial evidence and does not impose a stricter standard of appellate review than the rational juror’s reasonable doubt standard.

State of Louisiana v. Jewel Demon Humphrey · filed 2023-03-29

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.

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

State of Louisiana v. Toby · filed 2023-04-19

Further, in a case based on circumstantial evidence, “the evidence ‘must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.’” State v. Quinn, 19-647, pp. 6-7 (La. 9/1/20), 340 So.3d 829, 834 (quoting La.R.S. 15:438), cert. denied, 141 S.Ct. 1406 (2021). ... Based on the record before us, we find that Defendant’s conviction is based on impermissible speculation and due process requires reversal.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; the rule guides the reasonable doubt inquiry under Jackson rather than creating a separate test.

State of Louisiana Versus Pedro A. Monterroso · filed 2023-04-26

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.” Id. (citing 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; this rule guides the reasonable doubt inquiry rather than creating a separate test.

The State of Louisiana Versus Steven R Tate AKA "Bubba" · filed 2023-06-21

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 works with the Jackson sufficiency test to assess whether direct and circumstantial evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

State of Louisiana v. Bethley · filed 2023-06-21

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

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

State of Louisiana in the Interest of H.D., IV · filed 2023-06-28

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 evidence in a case resting essentially on circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Howell · filed 2023-06-28

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

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

State of Louisiana v. Wayne · filed 2023-06-28

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.

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

State of Louisiana v. Johnson · filed 2023-08-09

If a case rests 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 before it can support a conviction.

State of Louisiana v. Scott · filed 2023-08-30

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.” ... From this evidence, a rational juror could have inferred that, in taking the firearm with him, Defendant gave no thought to interfering with the results of a criminal investigation or proceeding.

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

State Of Louisiana v. Curtin · filed 2023-10-05

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.

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

State of Louisiana v. Watson · filed 2023-10-18

When the conviction is based upon circumstantial evidence, La.R.S. 15:438 provides that the state “must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence” in order to convict. ... The evidence presented, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, proved beyond a reasonable doubt and to the exclusion of every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, all of the elements of first-degree murder.

Section 15:438 guides the jury’s consideration of circumstantial evidence but imposes no stricter standard than the rational juror reasonable doubt standard.

State of Louisiana v. McDonough · filed 2023-10-27

It is important to note that the standard found in La. R.S. 15:438 is not a stricter standard than “the more general rational juror’s reasonable doubt formula,” i.e., the Jackson v. Virginia standard. ... Rather, 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; that rule helps determine reasonable doubt under the Jackson standard.

State of Louisiana Versus Lawrence Sly · filed 2023-11-02

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, La. R.S. 15:438 provides that in order to convict, assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. State v. Becnel, 17-591 (La. App. 5 Cir. 6/27/18), 250 So.3d 1207, 1225. 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 as part of the reasonable-doubt inquiry.

State of Louisiana Versus Corey Woods AKA "Cocomo" · filed 2023-11-15

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. ... Upon review of the record, we find that a rational trier of fact could have found that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient under the Jackson standard to convict Defendant of three counts of second degree murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

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

State of Louisiana v. Logan Smith · filed 2023-11-15

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; the rule guides the reasonable-doubt inquiry rather than creating a separate test.

State of Louisiana Versus Alexsy Mejia · filed 2023-11-29

“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.” Id. (citing 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 guides jurors evaluating circumstantial evidence but does not impose a stricter appellate standard than the rational juror reasonable doubt test.

State of Louisiana v. Burns · filed 2023-12-06

Louisiana Revised Statutes 15:438 does not establish a stricter standard of review than the more general rational juror’s reasonable doubt formula enunciated by Jackson, Id., rather the circumstantial evidence rule serves as a helpful evidentiary guide for jurors.

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

State of Louisiana v. Carlin Tremell Cotton · filed 2024-01-10

If a case rests 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 and helps courts assess reasonable doubt under Jackson.

State of Louisiana Versus Damon Stephney · filed 2024-02-28

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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; this rule helps determine reasonable doubt under the Jackson standard rather than creating a separate test.

State of Louisiana Versus Authur Johnson · filed 2024-02-28

When circumstantial evidence is used to prove the commission of an offense, 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 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 before it can support a conviction.

State of Louisiana v. John L. Fussell, Sr. · filed 2024-02-28

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 other reasonable hypothesis of innocence. La. R.S. 15:438. ... After viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, we find the evidence was sufficient for the jury to infer defendant was guilty of conspiracy to commit second degree murder.

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

State of Louisiana v. Ewell · filed 2024-02-28

If a case rests essentially upon circumstantial evidence, that evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ... The totality of such evidence excludes every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and negates any reasonable probability of misidentification, proving Ewell as the perpetrator of the December 24, 2019, robbery.

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

State of Louisiana v. Alexander · filed 2024-04-23

But where there is no direct evidence presented proving one or more of the elements of the offense, La. R.S. 15:438 governs circumstantial evidence and 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.” ... Viewing the circumstantial evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational trier of fact could have found that the state proved defendant’s identity as the killer.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; speculation cannot fill gaps in proof of a conviction.

State of Louisiana v. Bartie · filed 2024-06-20

Although we acknowledge that the State’s counterpoint argument regarding the victim’s consumption of methamphetamine is intelligent and echoes the State’s similar rebuttal reasoning at trial, it does not fill two gaps in the evidence. First, the record does not demonstrate that Defendant distributed seven grams of methamphetamine to the victim. Specifically, even though Bonin stated that she saw Defendant sell methamphetamine to the victim, the record is void of any evidence which quantified the amount provided to her. Thus, the State’s assertion is based solely upon speculation. Secondly, and more importantly, neither Bonin nor anyone else testified that the victim ingested the methamphetamine Defendant provided to her.

Section 15:438 requires circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence; this requirement helps determine reasonable doubt rather than creating a separate test.

State of Louisiana Versus Edwar Lopez AKA "Mantequilla" · filed 2024-08-21

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 to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence as part of the sufficiency analysis.

State of Louisiana Versus Landon P Rogers · filed 2024-08-28

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.”

When the State relies on circumstantial evidence to prove an essential element, the court assumes every fact the evidence tends to prove and requires the evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

State of Louisiana v. Jones · filed 2024-08-28

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. ... The evidence, as well as defendant’s admission, excludes every reasonable hypothesis of his innocence.