Skip to main content

Henderson v. State

Citations

  • 679 So. 2d 805
  • 1996 WL 425655

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • emphasizing “that the State was not required to exclude any unreasonable hypothesis” and concluding that the argued hypothesis “in light of the evidence, created a legitimate question for the jury to determine”
  • Although State is required to provide evidence inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence in order to submit case to jury, State is not required to exclude any unreasonable hypothesis.
  • “While we must agree with [appellant] that the State was required to provide evidence inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence, we emphasize that the State was not required to exclude any unreasonable hypothesis.”
  • “While we must agree with [appellant] that the State was required to provide evidence inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence, we emphasize that the State was not required to exclude any unreasonable hypothesis.”
  • “While we must agree with [Appellant] that the State was required to provide evidence inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence, we emphasize that the State was not required to exclude any unreasonable hypothesis.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cope, Levy and Fletcher

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.