149 So. 3d 981 - State v. Mire’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
January 2016
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Mart · State v. Oliphant · State v. Carmouche
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.
“Notably, jurors heard Gregory Raspberry testify that, on several occasions, the defendant spoke of killing the victim. Any assessment as to his credibility was certainly within the province of the jury, as the trier of fact. See State v. Oliphant, 13-2973 (La.2/21/14), 133 So.3d 1255 . The jury also heard witness statements indicating that the defendant and the victim had experienced conflict, that the victim allegedly owed the defendant money, that the defendant admitted to repeatedly discharging his weapon (resulting in multiple projectile injuries to the victim), that the defendant left the victim in the marsh at the scene, and that the defendant misled and misdirected those searching for the victim in the days after the incident. Giving the jury's fact-finding role and its apparent rejection of the defendant's version of events, I find these factors sufficiently support the jury's determination of specific intent to kill the victim or to inflict great bodily harm. State v. Mire, 2014-435 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/8/14) , 149 So.3d 981 , 996-7.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“We find that the State did not exclude every reasonable doubt that Defendant had the specific intent to kill the victim. Accordingly, the evidence was insufficient to support Defendant's conviction for second degree murder.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“that a lack of motive may properly be considered as a circumstance mitigating against specific intent”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.