Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 503 So. 2d 643 - State v. Parker

503 So. 2d 643 - State v. Parker’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably 865 So. 2d 284 - State v. Hampton (2004), 756 So. 2d 1218 - State v. Coleman (2000)

39 state decisions

2101987199020002010decided

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 445 So. 2d 1171 - State v. Williams · 430 So. 2d 1286 - State v. Lewis · 382 So. 2d 921 - State v. Ortego · 353 So. 2d 1013 - State v. Underwood · 437 So. 2d 276 - State v. Sherer

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

  1. “"If the defendant is convicted of two or more offenses based on the same act or transaction, or constituting parts of a common scheme or plan, the terms of imprisonment shall be served concurrently unless the court expressly directs that some or all be served consecutively...."”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Other factors must be taken into consideration in determining whether sentences should be served consecutively. State v. Ortego, 382 So.2d 921, 923 (La.1980); State v. Ashley, 463 So.2d 794 (La.App. 2nd Cir.1985). Some of those factors include defendant’s criminal history, State v. Ortego, supra; the dangerousness of the offense, State v. Underwood, 353 So.2d 1013 (La.1978); the viciousness of the crimes, State v. Murdock, 416 So.2d 103 (La.1982); the harm done to the victim, State v. Lewis, 430 So.2d 1286 (La.App. 1st Cir.1983); the potential for defendant’s rehabilitation, State v. Sherer, 437 So.2d 276 (La.1983); and the danger posed by the defendant to the public safety, State v. Carter, 412 So.2d 540 (La.1982).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““[T]he imposition of consecutive sentences for crimes arising from a single course of conduct requires particular justification.” Id. [State v. Parker, 503 So.2d 643, 646 (La.App. 4th Cir.1987)] (citing State v. Messer, 408 So.2d 1354 (La.1982); State v. Mosley, 466 So.2d 733 (La.App. 4th Cir.1985)).”
    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.