604 So. 2d 1323 - State v. Hankerson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Johnnie says the guy we—first when he was telling about this dope he says you don't understand. He said the guy I got this dope from—the only way I can prove it to you is through this man, and he'll kill me; these are serious people. So we're still talking about the cocaine that we busted him for. At the point where he starts telling me this case, I said, Johnnie, when I know that you've been straight about what we're doing here today, not about 2000 kilos you think you can get because I don't believe a word you're saying until you prove otherwise. You're going to prove to me where this dope came from, how you got it, how much you paid for it, how you transported it. When you've done that, then we'll talk about the rest of it. He said I can do it. I'm telling you I can give you one you never got in Baton Rouge. * * * * * * While he's still trying to explain this, and I'm telling him you can sit on that because I don't believe it. That's when I bring him back to this. I mean what am I—Judge, I already know he's lied to me. I'm trying to give you my understanding so you'll understand. I know he's lied. He's really got to convince me that he's told me the truth about this. If he's not going to be truthful about this, I'm not going to get narcotics agents involved in fifty kilos of cocaine. THE COURT: All right, all I'm interested in though is at what point the conversation turned to some other deal and who suggested that. A. Johnnie indicated that he could turn it— THE COURT: Wh”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 604 So. 2d 1330 - State v. Hankerson

2. “A. ... So they were clear on the fact that they would get a substantial assistance letter. As far as sentencing or any of that, that it was up to the district attorney and the judge. Q. Was this arrangement explained to them, or did they enter into this arrangement before, during or after their confession? A. Before. Q. And at what point in time—at what point in time did they then enter into this arrangement with you for substantial cooperation? A. They initially gave a story as they were separated that differed in each one of them blaming it on the other one, and Greg Green trying to blame it on them, and them trying to blame it on Greg Green, and that as they told the story we would talk to the other one, and it wasn't long before we made it clear to them that all of them were telling a different story. And it was at this time Johnnie said, all right, and he said, if—if I run the deal down to you and if I can lead to a large seizure of cocaine, he said, what would you consider to be large? And I said, Johnnie, I don't know. What can you do? So I threw out a figure of fifty kilos—at that time. As he explained it, I explained the substantial assistance letter to him, and the whole nine yards. * * * * * * Q. Did you offer them anything at all for their confession? A. No, sir. Q. Well, how about this deal you told us about, this agreement of cooperation? A. That if it resulted—if they did cooperate, that they would get a letter, but that was if they cooperated and it resulted i”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 604 So. 2d 1330 - State v. Hankerson

3. “occurred in the Hankersons' residence on the same day that the warrant was executed, and it was monitored and taped through the use of electronic surveillance equipment. The”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 604 So. 2d 1330 - State v. Hankerson