344 So. 2d 1024 - State v. Cox’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably 448 So. 2d 645 - State v. Davis (1984), 407 So. 2d 685 - State v. Bruins (1981)
42 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 State v. Truby · 337 So. 2d 475 - State v. McCarroll · 337 So. 2d 1131 - State v. Sanders · State v. Penniman · 313 So. 2d 799 - State v. Gyles
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"... The escape statute itself causes an enhancement of penalty by requiring consecutive sentences because of a defendant's previous felony conviction. Although the legislature chose to make the enhancement to a felony dependent upon a defendant's escape from the Department of Corrections instead of relating the enhancement directly to his previous commission of a felony, we see no real difference because only convicted felons may be sentenced to the Department of Corrections."”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“`[c]riminal and penal laws are to be strictly construed and in the absence of an express legislative intent any doubt should be resolved in favor of lenity.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Anders · State v. Street“"Consequently, we find that the penalty provisions enacted in R.S. 14:95.1 were intended by the legislature to delimit the permissible punishment for that offense because the statute itself takes into account the fact of defendant's previous felony conviction and the legislature gave no indication that it wanted the multiple-billing procedure to remain available as a vehicle for further enlargement of the penalty." (Emphasis added)”
2 later decisions 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.