Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 445 So. 2d 12 - State v. Roberson

445 So. 2d 12 - State v. Roberson’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2018

18 state decisions

1301983199020002010decided

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 · 425 So. 2d 1251 - State v. Telsee · State v. Smith · 425 So. 2d 1222 - State v. Trahan · 386 So. 2d 1374 - State v. Robinson

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

  1. “sufficient resemblance to reasonably test identification.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"Appellant characterizes the court's participation in the examination of the witness as a `recapitulation' or `repetition' of testimony in violation of Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure Article 772. That article prohibits the court from expressing its opinion or commenting on innocence or guilt. State v. Williams, 375 So.2d 1379 (La.1979). It does not, however, restrain the court in its proper role of clarifying testimony when necessary or desirable. Id. "It is clear from the colloquy that the trial judge was not commenting on the evidence, but merely attempting to clarify the prior testimony and the witness' response. We do not believe there was any prejudice caused to the defendant, particularly in light of the fact that the witness did not revise her previous answer in response to the court's clarification of the question. The trial judge's remarks, therefore, did not constitute an impermissible comment on the evidence. State v. Kelly, 367 So.2d 832 (La.1979)."”
    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.