579 So. 2d 472 - State v. Dickerson’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently July 2014
24 state decisions
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 Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · McMann v. Richardson · United States v. Matlock · Pelaes 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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Defendant claims that the prosecution failed to prove he was in possession of the cocaine seized. However, the prosecution does not need to show that defendant was in actual possession of the illegal substance in order to convict, only constructive possession. State v. Edwards, 354 So.2d 1322 (La.1978). A person may be in constructive possession of the substance, even though not in physical possession, if it is subject to his dominion and control. State v. Sweeney, 443 So.2d 522 (La.1983). In order to convict a person on the basis of constructive possession, something more than mere presence in the area where the drug is found must be shown. State v. Alford, 323 So.2d 788 (La.1975). Some of the factors to consider in determining whether or not a defendant exercises dominion and control are his knowledge that illegal drugs are in the area, his relationship with the person found to be in possession, his access to the area where the drugs were found, and his physical proximity to the drugs. State v. Love, 527 So.2d 62 (La. App. 3 Cir.1988); State v. Walker, 514 So.2d 602 (La.App. 4 Cir.1987).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Odle“While knowledge of the right to refuse consent is one factor to be taken into account, it is not determinative of the issue of voluntariness of the consent. State v. Dunbar, 356 So.2d 956 (La.1978). State v. Dickerson, 579 So.2d 472, at 480 (La.App. 3d Cir.1991).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bostic“the trial court's imposition of a fine upon the indigent defendant in this case, which did not provide for a jail term in the event of default of payment of the fine, is not excessive and is not an illegal sentence.”
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.