414 So. 2d 730 - State v. Schaeffer’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
35
cited by 35 later decisions
1
states following
April 1992
most recently cited
1 federal appellate · 34 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · United States v. Ventresca · 338 So. 2d 584 - State v. Crosby · 360 So. 2d 842 - State v. Jackson
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A. Manufacture; distribution. Except as authorized by this part, it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally: (1) To produce, manufacture, distribute, or dispense or possess with intent to produce, manufacture, distribute, or dispense, a controlled dangerous substance classified in Schedule II; (2) To create, distribute, or possess with intent to distribute, a counterfeit controlled dangerous substance classified in Schedule II. B. Penalties for violation of Subsection A. Except as provided in Subsections E and F hereof, any person who violates Subsection A with respect to: (1) A substance classified in Schedule II which is a narcotic drug, shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment at hard labor for not less than five years nor more than thirty years; and may, in addition, be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than fifteen thousand dollars; (2) Any other controlled dangerous substance classified in Schedule II shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment at hard labor for not more than ten years; and, in addition, may be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than fifteen thousand dollars. C. Possession. It is unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally to possess a controlled dangerous substance as classified in Schedule II unless such substance was obtained directly, or pursuant to a valid prescription or order from a practitioner or provided in R.S. 40:978, while acting in the course of his professional practice, or except as otherwise authorized”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Raheem
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.