Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 319 SO2D 357 - State v. Mitchell

State v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently March 2018

17 state decisions

9019751980199020002010decided

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. Edwards · 307 So. 2d 342 - State v. Craddock

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

  1. “discoverable by a mere inspection of the pleadings and proceedings.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Article 3 of the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure provides: “Where no procedure is specifically prescribed by this Code or by statute, the court may proceed in a manner consistent with the spirit of the provisions of this Code and other applicable statutory and constitutional provisions.” As to the court’s authority, Article 17 provides in part: “A court possesses inherently all powers necessary for the exercise of its jurisdiction and the enforcement of its lawful orders, including authority to issue such writs and orders as may be necessary or proper in aid of its jurisdiction.... ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““The provisions of our Code of Criminal Procedure are intended ‘to provide for the just determination of criminal proceedings.’ They are to be construed ‘to secure simplicity in procedure, fairness in administration, and the elimination of unjustifiable delay.’ ” La.Code Crim. Proc. art. 2. * * * “Where the law is silent in such cases, the inherent authority of the court would permit a rule of reason requiring the proceedings to be conducted with dignity and in an orderly and expeditious manner. La.Code Crim. Proc. art. 17.””
    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.