Sorrells v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “circumstantial evidence is as probative as direct evidence in establishing guilt” and that “circumstantial evidence alone can be sufficient to establish guilt”
• holding that circumstantial evidence is as probative as direct evidence in establishing guilt, and circumstantial evidence alone can be sufficient to establish guilt
• noting that, in general, theft occurring right after assault will support inference that assault was intended to facilitate theft
• discussing Cooper and required nexus between assault and theft to prove robbery
• “‘When the record supports conflicting inferences, we presume that the factfinder resolved the conflicts in favor of the prosecution and therefore defer to that determination.’”
• circumstantial evidence as probative as direct evidence in establishing guilt

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).