State v. Dill’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently March 2019
19 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 Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Agurs · State v. Richardson
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) When committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger. This court has previously held in State v. Dill, 461 So.2d 1130 (La.App. 5 Cir.1984) writ denied 475 So.2d 1106 (La.1985) that the adjudication of the defendant's culpability by the trier of fact focuses on a two-fold inquiry: 1) From the facts presented, could the defendant reasonably have believed his life to be in imminent danger and 2) Was deadly force necessary to prevent the danger.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"(1) when committed in self defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[w]hen there is conflicting testimony as to a factual matter, the question of credibility of witnesses is within the discretion of the trier of fact.”
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.