Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 567 SO2D 800 - State v. McIntyre

State v. McIntyre’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 2015

7 state decisions

30199020002010decided

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 422 So. 2d 416 - State v. Ford · State v. Champagne · State v. Monk · 544 So. 2d 86 - State v. McIntyre · State v. Monk

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

  1. “In State v. Champagne, 506 So.2d 1377 (La.App. 3 Cir.1987), this Court held that a defendant’s presence is not required when the trial court merely corrected a previously imposed illegal sentence. However, this case is quite different. Defendant’s conviction and sentence of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute was vacated, and the defendant was subsequently convicted and ordered sentenced on a different, lesser conviction of possession of cocaine. When a conviction and sentence are entirely vacated and remanded for entry of a guilty plea and sentencing, the defendant’s presence in court for such action is clearly required by La. C.Cr.P. Art. 835. This |2f,is to insure that defendant has an adequate opportunity to present evidence and to dispute the accuracy of the sentencing judge’s reasons for sentencing and to insure that defendant is apprised of the charge for which punishment is imposed. See, State v. Ford, 422 So.2d 416 (La.1982); State v. Monk, 528 So.2d 173 (La.App. 5 Cir.1988), rev’d on other grounds, 532 So.2d 1143 (La.1988).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In felony cases the defendant shall always be present when sentence is pronounced.... If a sentence is improperly pronounced in the defendant's absence, he shall be resentenced when his presence is secured.”
    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.