352 So. 2d 220 - State v. Terrell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

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

1. “"A mere act or failure to act that produces criminal consequences, where there is no requirement of criminal intent ..."”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Larson · State v. Pickering

2. “The repeal of any law shall not have the effect of releasing or extinguishing any penalty, forfeiture or liability, civil or criminal, incurred under such law unless the repealing act expressly so provides, and such law shall be treated as still remaining in force for the purpose of sustaining any proper action or prosecution for the enforcement of such penalty, forfeiture or liability.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Meshell · 375 So. 2d 1344 - State v. Kelly

3. “Although the argument shrouds the issue in semantics, it amounts to a claim that criminal conduct requires intent to do or fail to do something. The argument is specifically answered by Article 8(2) of the Criminal Code (La.Rev. Stat.l4:8(2)). In defining criminal conduct the article states that it may consist of “(a) mere act or failure to act that produces criminal consequences, where there is no requirement of criminal intent.” |19A crime may therefore be enacted where there is no requirement of criminal intent when there is a failure to act which produces criminal consequences.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 41 So. 3d 625 - State v. Watts