403 So. 2d 1205 - State v. Goods’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently October 2003 · most notably 433 So. 2d 688 - State v. Smith (1983), 426 So. 2d 1323 - State v. Jones (1983)
31 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 Jackson v. Virginia · 354 So. 2d 1332 - State v. Schwartz · 385 So. 2d 248 - State v. Byrd · 374 So. 2d 1195 - State v. Spencer · 345 So. 2d 1179 - State v. Hegwood
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In the following cases, upon the request of the defendant or the state, the court shall promptly admonish the jury to disregard a remark or comment made during the trial, or in argument within the hearing of the jury, when the remark is irrelevant or immaterial and of such a nature that it might create prejudice against the defendant, or the state, in the mind of the jury: (1) When the remark or comment is made by the judge, the district attorney, or a court official, and the remark is not within the scope of Article 770; or (2) When the remark or comment is made by a witness or person other than the judge, district attorney, or a court official, regardless of whether the remark or comment is within the scope of Article 770. "In such cases, on motion of the defendant, the court may grant a mistrial if it is satisfied that an admonition is not sufficient to assure the defendant a fair trial."”
9 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Allen · State v. Overton“"LSA-C.Cr.Proc. Art. 771 leaves the decision as to whether to grant a mistrial or admonition to the sound discretion of the trial court. State v. Harris, 383 So.2d 1 (La.1980); State v. Hegwood, 345 So.2d 1179 (La.1977); State v. Sepulvado, 342 So.2d 630 (La.1977). A mistrial is a drastic remedy and is warranted only when trial error results in substantial prejudice to the defendant sufficient to deprive him of a fair trial. State v. Harris, supra ; State v. Williams, 375 So.2d 364 (La.1979); State v. Heads, 370 So.2d 564 (La.1979)." State v. Goods, 403 So.2d 1205 (La.1981).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"... L.S.A.-R.S. 14:60 ... requires that the State prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a person was present within the burglarized structure, watercraft, or movable as one of the essential elements of aggravated burglary."”
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.