Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 581 So. 2d 384 - State v. Bell

581 So. 2d 384 - State v. Bell’s Empirical Analysis

1991

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
February 2011
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 2011

7 state decisions

30199120002010decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · 459 So. 2d 714 - State v. Patterson · State v. Williams

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 an indictment it is sufficient for the purpose of identifying the defendant to state his true name, or to state the name, appellation, or nickname by which he is known, or if no better way of identifying him is practicable, to state a fictitious name, or to describe him as a person whose name is unknown, or in any other manner. In stating the true name or the name by which the defendant is known or a fictitious name, it is sufficient to state a surname, a surname and one or more given names, or a surname and one or more abbreviations or initials of a given name or names. If the true name of a defendant identified in the indictment otherwise than by his true name is disclosed by the evidence or is otherwise discovered, the court shall cause the indictment to be amended to show his true name, and the proceedings shall continue against the defendant in his true name. In no case is it necessary to aver or prove that the true name of the defendant is unknown to the grand jury, complainant, or prosecuting officer.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “La.C.Cr.P, article 466 does not prohibit the state from using both the real name of a defendant and his alias in the bill of information.”
    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.