State of Louisiana v. Karen Marie Calloway

Summary

The court reversed the court of appeal, reinstated Karen Calloway's conviction and three-year sentence for possessing stolen things, and held that the jury rationally could infer guilty knowledge from the circumstances of the purchase and continued possession of the vehicles. It emphasized that guilty knowledge under the statute is assessed objectively and that an appellate court may not substitute its view of the evidence or witness credibility for the jury's unless no rational juror could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court remanded for consideration of Calloway's remaining excessive-sentence claim. Chief Justice Calogero and Justice Johnson, dissenting, would not have reinstated the conviction and objected to the majority's treatment of the chaotic post-Katrina circumstances and the evidence of Calloway's lack of knowledge.