Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 107 SO3D 748 - State v. Drew

State v. Drew’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
November 2016
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Anders v. California · Boykin v. Alabama · 573 So. 2d 528 - State v. Benjamin · 704 So. 2d 241 - State v. Jyles · 653 So. 2d 1176 - State v. Reed

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Defendant is precluded from seeking review of his sentence because it was imposed under a sentencing cap in conformity with a plea agreement set forth in the record at the time of the plea. See La. C. Cr. P. art. 881.2; State v. Young, 96-0195 (La.10/15/96), 680 So.2d 1171 . However, our error patent review indicates an illegally lenient sentence which we are required to vacate. The trial judge failed to restrict at least two years of defendant’s sentence for forcible rape from benefit of parole, probation or suspension of sentence, as required by La. R.S. 14:42.1(33). Because the language of the sentencing provision gives the trial judge discretion in determining the exact length of time that benefits were to be withheld, the sentence must be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing in compliance with La. R.S. 14:42.1. State v. Carter, 43,304 (La.App. 2 Cir. 6/18/08), 987 So.2d 364 , writ denied, 08-2752 (La.9/25/09), 18 So.3d 86 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.