State v. Perry’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"We believe that defendant's confinement by the Department of Corrections was `lawful custody' because he was being held under color of law and his custody had not been legally challenged. See State v. Johns , 339 So.2d 801 (La. 1976). Although he would have been able to show a defect in his custody through collateral attack, he had not applied for release from commitment through legal channels on that basis and his custody was facially legal. "The words `lawful custody' are described in the official revision comment to the escape statute, R.S. 14:110, in the following way: "`As long as the arrest and commitment are "legal" any attempt to escape is a crime, despite the guilt or innocence of the culprit. But if the warrant or arrest or commitment is void, the prisoner is not liable for escaping. However, an informality or irregularity in the process of commitment is not justification to escape.' (citations omitted) "Thus, an escape may be justifiable where the confinement is without color of authority in, for example, situations where a person has been confined either without any authority at all or where the judgment was void on its face. However, where a prisoner is properly in custody under an order not void on its face and is serving a sentence under color of law, he cannot, because his confinement is subject to collateral attack, take matters into his own hands by way of escape but must apply for relief through regular legal channels. See City of New Orleans v. Lyons , 34”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 474 So. 2d 120 - Dietz v. State · 546 So. 2d 1231 - State v. Johnston

2. “A. Simple escape shall mean any of the following: (1) The intentional departure, under circumstances wherein human life is not endangered, of a person imprisoned, committed, or detained from a place where such person is legally confined, from a designated area of a place where such person is legally confined, or from the lawful custody of any law enforcement officer or officer of the Department of Public Safety and Corrections. (2) The failure of a criminal serving a sentence and participating in a work release program authorized by law to report or return from his planned employment or other activity under the program at the appointed time.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Thompson