340 So. 2d 1369 - State v. Perique’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently October 2010 · most notably 360 So. 2d 500 - State v. Drew (1978), State v. Chopin (1979)
32 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 Terry v. Ohio · Brady v. State of Maryland · Adams v. Williams · Taylor v. Louisiana · Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“On previous occasions, this court has allowed testimony at trial that track marks were present on the arm of an accused to prove an essential ingredient of the crime charged, i.e., guilty knowledge. State v. Thomas, 329 So.2d 704 (La. 1976); State v. Pierre, 302 So.2d 10 (La.1974); State v. Clouatre, 262 La. 651 , 264 So.2d 595 (1972); State v. Williams, 260 La. 1167 , 258 So.2d 539 (1972); State v. Smith, 257 La. 896 , 244 So.2d 824 (1971). In these cited cases, the presence of track marks was considered relevant to prove guilty knowledge. Likewise, in this matter, the lack of track marks is relevant in the proof of intent to distribute the drug.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brown“". . . Guilty knowledge is an essential ingredient of the crime of possession of a controlled dangerous substance. State v. Porter, 296 So.2d 302 (La.1974). Whether the accused knew the substance was a narcotic drug is a matter of proof by direct or circumstantial evidence.. . ." ( State v. Perique, 340 So.2d 1369 (La.1976))”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[n]ew and material evidence [exists] that, notwithstanding the exercise of reasonable diligence by the defendant, was not discovered before or during the trial, is available, and [that] if the evidence had been introduced at the trial it would probably have changed the verdict or judgment of guilty.”
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.