Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 444 So. 2d 243 - State v. Freeman

444 So. 2d 243 - State v. Freeman’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
January 2011
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently January 2011

12 state decisions

701983199020002010decided

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 State v. Sepulvado · State v. Prestridge · 387 So. 2d 1097 - State v. Vincent · 412 So. 2d 564 - State v. Herrod · 432 So. 2d 243 - State v. Finley

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

  1. “"Article 1, sec. 20 of the Louisiana Constitution prohibits the imposition of excessive sentences. A sentence may be excessive even though it falls within the statutory limits. A sentence is excessive when it is grossly out of proportion to the severity of the offense, or when it makes no measureable contribution to the acceptable goals of punishment and it is nothing more than the needless and purposeless imposition of pain and suffering. Moreover, maximum sentences are appropriately imposed only for the most serious violation of the described offense, and for the ... [worst] kind of offender. Under art. 894.1, the trial judge should consider three basic factors before imposing a prison sentence: (1) that there is an undue risk that the defendant will commit another crime during the period of suspension or probation, (2) that the defendant is in need of services of a custodial environment provided most effectively by a commitment to an institution, and (3) that a lesser sentence would deprecate the seriousness of the crime. The trial judge should also consider and accord some weight, though he need not state them all for the record, other factors such as the defendant's prior criminal record, the seriousness of the offense, the defendant's personal history and his potential for rehabilitation. Finally, the trial judge must state for the record the considerations taken into account and the factual basis supporting his sentencing choice." [Citations omitted.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The jury clearly intended to find the defendant guilty ..., and its verdict should not be overturned because an arguably ambiguous and inartful expression frames it.”
    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.