137 So. 3d 663 - State v. Gregory’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
December 2016
most recently cited
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. · United States v. Taylor · 847 So. 2d 1198 - State v. Love · 630 So. 2d 1284 - State v. Rome · State v. Wells
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our review to determine whether a trial judge abused her discretion in ruling on this mixed question of law and fact requires us to examine both her findings of fact and her choice of law to be applied to those facts. First, in reviewing a trial judge’s findings of fact, we are extremely deferential and "will 'not overturn those findings unless there is no evidence to support’ ” them. State v. McClendon, 13-1454, p. 6 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1/30/14), 133 So.3d 239, 245 , writ denied 14-0324 (La.2/19/14), 133 So.3d 667 (quoting State v. Wells, 08-2262, p. 4 (La.7/6/10), 45 So.3d 577, 580 ). "This extremely heightened deference is rooted in the limitations of our appellate jurisdiction set forth in La. Const, art. 5, § 10(B), which provides: 'In criminal cases, [an appellate court's] jurisdiction extends only to questions of law.’ ’’ Id. Second, we review whether the trial judge’s choice and application of law were proper. A trial judge necessarily abuses her discretion in denying a motion to quash if her ruling is based on an erroneous view of the law. See State v. Hayes, 10-1538, p. 11 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/1/11), 75 So.3d 8, 15 (citing Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., 496 U.S. 384, 405 , 110 S.Ct. 2447 , 110 L.Ed.2d 359 (1990); United States v. Taylor, 487 U.S. 326, 336 , 108 S.Ct. 2413 , 101 L.Ed.2d 297 (1988) (Noting that "discretionary choices are not left to a court’s inclination, but to its judgment,’’ which is guided by sound legal principles)). If a trial judge in exercising her”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“shall specify distinctly the grounds on which it is based. The court shall hear no objection based on grounds not stated in the motion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“before commencement of trial.” La.C.Cr.P. art. 535 B. .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.