56 So. 3d 362 - State v. Willis’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The sentence imposed [in Johnson ], including the enhancement, was within the sentencing cap. We held that there was no due process violation under the particular facts of that case because the bill of information charged that the dangerous weapon used in the armed robbery was a firearm and, significantly, during the Boykin colloquy, prior to accepting the defendant’s guilty plea, the court informed the defendant that it intended to impose the five-year sentence enhancement and the defendant had an opportunity to | indiscuss the matter with his attorney. Although we concluded that Johnson was not denied due process, we noted in the opinion that “[t]he better practice would be for the district attorney to charge the defendant on the bill of information that the defendant did commit the armed robbery on the victim while armed with a firearm ‘contrary to La. R.S. 14:64 and 64.3,’ or file written notice in advance of trial or the guilty plea proceeding that it intends to seek enhancement of the sentence under LSA-R.S. 14:64.3.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Rodriguez

2. “B. The following grounds, while not controlling the discretion of the court, shall be accorded weight in its determination of suspension of sentence or probation: (6) The offender used threats of or actual violence in the commission of the offense. (10) The offender used a dangerous weapon in the commission of the offense.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Womack