414 So. 2d 689 - State v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2016 · most notably California v. Ramos (1983), State v. Smith (1983)
50 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 · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Drope v. Missouri · United States v. Myers · 404 So. 2d 466 - State v. Lindsey
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[A] district court could consider (1) the amount of prejudice that resulted from the failure to disclose, (2) the reason for nondisclosure, (3) the extent to which the harm caused by nondisclosure was mitigated by subsequent events, (4) the weight of the properly admitted evidence supporting the defendant's guilt, and (5) other relevant factors rising out of the circumstances of the case." 550 F.2d at 1043 ; State v. Brown, 414 So.2d 689 (La. 1982). State v. Bias, 393 So.2d 677 (La. 1981).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. McKinney · State v. Smith“`[M]oderate mental retardation and low intelligence or illiteracy do not of themselves vitiate the ability to knowingly and intelligently waive constitutional rights and make a free and voluntary confession.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Holmes · State v. Green“"No one can impeach his own witness, unless he have been taken by surprise by the testimony of such witness, or unless the witness show hostility toward him, and, even then, the impeachment must be limited to evidence of prior contradictory statements."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Gray · State v. Lasseigne
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.