32 So. 3d 1084 - State v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
August 2017
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · 661 So. 2d 442 - State v. Smith · State v. Holstead · State v. Prejean · State v. Saibold
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.
“A. Indecent behavior with juveniles is the commission of any of the following acts with the intention of arousing or gratifying the sexual desires of either person: (1) Any lewd or lascivious act 1 upon the person or in the presence of any child under the age of seventeen, where there is an age difference of greater than two years between the two persons. Lack of knowledge of the child’s age shall not be a defense; or (2) The transmission of an electronic textual communication or an electronic visual communication depicting lewd or lascivious conduct, text, or images to any person reasonably believed to be under the age of seventeen and reasonably believed to be at least two years younger than the offender. It shall not be a defense that the person who actually receives the transmission is not under the age of seventeen. 2”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jones“[ I ]n order to have convicted Defendant of the lesser and included offense of attempted indecent behavior with a juvenile, the jury would have had to find that the Defendant specifically intended to commit a lewd and lascivious act upon the victim, or in the victim’s presence, and did an act in furtherance thereof. State v. Gaspard, 02-1040 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/03) , 841 So.2d 1021 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A. Any person who, having a specific intent to commit a crime, does or omits an act for the purpose of and tending directly toward the accomplishing of his object is guilty of an attempt to commit the offense intended; and it shall be immaterial whether, under the circumstances, he would have actually accomplished his purpose.”
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.