426 So. 2d 95 - State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

27 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Upon motion of a defendant, a mistrial shall be ordered when a remark or comment, made within the hearing of the jury by the judge, district attorney, or a court official, during the trial or in argument, refers directly or indirectly to: * * * * * * (3) The failure of the defendant to testify in his own defense;"”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Boutte · 537 So. 2d 386 - State v. Mullins

2. “In order for the State to obtain a conviction, it must prove the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant was convicted of manslaughter, a violation of La.R.S. 14:31(A), which provides in part: A. Manslaughter is: (1) A homicide which would be murder under either Article 30 (first degree murder) or Article 30.1 (second degree murder), but the offense is committed in sudden passion or heat of blood immediately caused by provocation sufficient to deprive an average person of his self-control and cool reflection. Provocation shall not reduce a homicide to manslaughter if the jury finds that the offender's blood had actually cooled, or that an average person's blood would have cooled, at the time the offense was committed;”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jackson · 640 So. 2d 488 - State v. Brown

3. ““Exculpatory evidence must be provided to the defense when it is material to guilt or punishment, regardless of the good faith or bad faith of the prosecutor. Brady v. Maryland, [ 373 U.S. 83 ] supra at 87, 83 S.Ct. [1194] at 1196 [ 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) ]. In United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 , 96 S.Ct. 2392 , 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976), the United States Supreme Court delineated three tests of materiality, depending on the type of request presented by the defense to the prosecutor. This case falls under the third category of cases set forth in United States v. Agurs, since the request for information was for all Brady material. This court in State v. Willie, 410 So.2d 1019, 1031 (La.1982), discussed the analysis for this type of request when there is undisclosed evidence which may constitute Brady material.3 Reversible error results when the undisclosed evidence, considered in the context of the entire record, “creates a reasonable doubt that did not otherwise exist.” United States v. Agurs, supra 427 U.S. at 112-13 , 96 S.Ct. at 2401-02 .” (Footnote omitted.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 562 So. 2d 978 - State v. Newton