163 So. 3d 858 - State v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 state decisions

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

1. “However, whether or not such pain or suffering was actually proven is not relevant to whether the evidence supports a conviction for cruelty to persons with infirmities. The evidence need only be sufficient to Improve that the defendant actively desired to cause the proscribed criminal consequences to follow his act and that he committed the act for the purpose and tending directly toward the accomplishing of that object. See, State v. Browhow, [41,686 (La.App.2d Cir. 12/13/06), 945 So.2d 890 ]. The reprehensible actions of the defendant established that he had a specific intent to mistreat G.S. Furthermore, his actions also sufficiently established his intent to cause the proscribed pain and suffering to her.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 204 So. 3d 1003 - State v. Smith