State v. Alvarez’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The officers therefore lawfully recovered the gun abandoned by defendant during the chase and had probable cause to arrest him for at least the offense of carrying a concealed weapon in violation of La. R.S. 14:95. See State v. Johnson, 94-1170, p. 4 (La.App. 4th Cir.8/23/95), 660 So.2d 942, 946 . Although the crime of carrying a concealed weapon is a misdemeanor and not a felony, it is a jailable offense and one involving risk to public safety. The officers [sic] warrantless entry of the apartment in hot pursuit to effectuate defendant’s arrest was therefore reasonable at its inception, and, as it turned out, possession of the firearm was chargeable as a felony offense although jurors ultimately acquitted defendant on | ¿¡that count. R.S. 14:95(E)(possession of a firearm while in possession of a controlled dangerous substance); cf. United States v. Santana, 427 U.S. 38, 43 , 96 S.Ct. 2406, 2410 , 49 L.Ed.2d 300 (1976)(“[A] suspect may not defeat an arrest which has been set in motion in a public place, and is therefore proper under [United States v.] Watson, [ 423 U.S. 411 , 96 S.Ct. 820 46 L.Ed.2d 598 (1976) ], by the expedient of escaping to a private place.”); see also State v. Walker, 06-1045 p. 5-6 (La.4/11/07), 953 So.2d 786, 790 ; compare Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740 , 104 S.Ct. 2091 , 80 L.Ed.2d 732 (1984)(Fourth Amendment does not permit warrant-less entry of home to arrest for a nonjailable traffic offense). The subsequent recovery of cocaine from defendant’s p”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 112 So. 3d 381 - State v. Carter

2. “Evidence presented at both the suppression hearing and at trial established that during the course of a traffic stop conducted at night in the Woodmere Subdivision in Jefferson Parish, described as a “high crime area,” police officers found their attention drawn to defendant as he observed the scene while standing between two apartment buildings and behaved in what appeared to the officers a nervous and erratic manner. When two officers approached defendant to ask him some questions after he balked at their initial requests that he come over to them, defendant turned and ran through the alleyway between the two apartment buildings. The officers gave chase. During the pursuit, defendant removed a gun from his waistband and discarded in the weapon in some bushes. He then ran into an apartment building and slammed the door shut. The pursuing officers kicked in the door, placed defendant under arrest, and in a search incident to that arrest removed a small bag containing rock cocaine from his pants pocket.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 79 So. 3d 386 - State v. Cummings