337 So. 2d 1049 - State v. Alfred’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably 847 So. 2d 1198 - State v. Love (2003), 376 So. 2d 136 - State v. Reaves (1979)
27 state decisions
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 Barker v. Wingo · United States v. Marion · Klopfer v. State of North Carolina · United States v. Ewell · Dillingham v. United States
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he amorphous quality of the right ... leads to the unsatisfactorily severe remedy of dismissal of the indictment when the right has been deprived. This is indeed a serious consequence because it means that a defendant who may be guilty of a serious crime will go free, without having been tried.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“... in a capital case Article 578 of the Code of Criminal Procedure allows a delay of three years from the date of institution of the prosecution within which the trial may be commenced. Such an enactment is a recognition by the legislature that the time limitation thereby ordained is reasonable and acceptable under ordinary circumstances. Statutes of limitation are the primary guarantees against inordinate delays between accusation and trial. La.Code Crim.Pro. arts. 578-82; 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 3281-82 ; United States v. Ewell, 383 U.S. 116 , 86 S.Ct. 773 , 15 L.Ed.2d 627 (1966); State v. Howard, 325 So.2d 812 (La.1976); State v. Stetson, 317 So.2d 172 (La.1975); State v. Gladden, 260 La. 735 , 257 So.2d 388 (1972). These statutes represent a legislative assessment of relative interests of the State and defendant in administering and receiving justice, and they should be considered by the courts. United States v. Marion, 404 U.S. 307 , 92 S.Ct. 455 , 30 L.Ed.2d 468 (1971); State v. Theard, 203 La. 1026 , 14 So.2d 824 (1943).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“not unreasonable for the prosecutor to avail himself of all legitimate means to gain adequate time to marshal the proof needed to properly present its case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.