Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 484 So. 2d 122 - State v. Fraser

484 So. 2d 122 - State v. Fraser’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

330
cited by 330 later decisions
3
states following
November 2017
most recently cited

329 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 330 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably State v. Williams (2001), 754 So. 2d 392 - State v. Jones (2000)

329 state decisions

16801986199020002010decided

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 Terry v. Ohio · Michigan v. Summers · Blackledge v. Perry · Local 408, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Board · Bozza v. United States

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

  1. “a sentence may be reviewed as to its legality on the application of the defendant or of the state....”
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(b) Distribution, dispensing, or possession with intent to produce, manufacture, distribute or dispense cocaine or cocaine base or a mixture or substance containing cocaine or its analogues as provided in Schedule 11(A)(4) of R.S. 40:964 shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment at hard labor for not less than five years nor more than thirty years, with the first five years of said sentence being without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence; and may, in addition, be sentenced to pay a fine of not more than fifty thousand dollars.”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “there is no codal or statutory authority for an appellate court to search the record for patent sentencing errors to the detriment of the only party who sought review by the appellate court.”
    9 later decisions 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.