536 So. 2d 671 - State v. Rexrode’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 state decisions

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. “[u]pon motion of a defendant, a mistrial shall be ordered when a remark or comment, made within the hearing of the jury by the judge, district attorney, or a court official, during the trial or in argument, refers directly or indirectly to: ... (3) the failure of the defendant to testify in his own defense.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Taylor · 823 So. 2d 987 - State v. Harry

2. “The fact that a prospective juror is acquainted with a party named in La. C.Cr.P. Art. 797(3) is not in itself grounds for a challenge for cause. The facts must reasonably lead to the conclusion that the relationship would influ ence the juror in arriving at a verdict. A challenge for cause should be granted even if the juror declares an ability to remain impartial when the juror’s responses reveal facts from which bias, prejudice, or impartiality may be reasonably implied. The trial judge is afforded wide discretion in ruling on a challenge for cause, and the ruling should not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. State v. Rexrode, 536 So.2d 671, at 673 (La.App. 3d Cir.1988).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Harris

3. “aided the illegal transfer of marijuana by indirectly procuring the party who actually consumated the sale.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 823 So. 2d 987 - State v. Harry