Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 157 La. 821 - State v. Ledoux

State v. Ledoux’s Empirical Analysis

1925

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
May 1983
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently May 1983

9 state decisions

401925193019401950196019701980decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on State v. Robertson · McArthur v. State · State v. Labry · State v. Goodwin · Grimes v. Hill

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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Evidence of the nature of that offered by the state, as a general rule, is not admissible, for it is evidence of an act not charged in the bill of indictment. If its admission in this instance does not constitute reversible error, it is only because defendant opened the door for its admission, as rebuttal evidence, by going beyond the bill of indictment, of his own motion, and testifying that he had never used, handled, or dealt in any manner with intoxicants, and therefore by his own act is in no position to complain”—citing Cyc., Vol. 40, page 2496.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Moreover, where, as is the case here, a witness testified on his examination in chief to a matter irrelevant to the issue, he may be contradicted with respect to it, though it is otherwise where the irrelevant matter is brought out on cross-examination.””
    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.