State v. Hearold

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that “when the entirety of the evidence, both admissible and inadmissible, is sufficient to support the conviction, the accused is not entitled to an acquittal”
• observing that “[w]hen issues are raised on appeal both as to the sufficiency of the evidence and as to one or more trial errors, the reviewing court should first determine the sufficiency of the evidence”
• reciting factors provided in State v. House, 325 So.2d 222, 225 (La. 1975)
• State obligated to disclose exculpatory evidence favorable to accused and material to guilt or punishment
• “Law enforcement officers may not testify as to the contents of an informant’s tip because such testimony violates the accused’s constitutional right to confront and cross-examine his accusers.”
• one-eighth ounce or 17 to 18 hits of methamphetamine not inconsistent with personal use; circumstances did not indicate intent to distribute when \drug was found in one package rather than in a 1 number of smaller packages measured out in single doses.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).