61 So. 3d 747 - State v. Langley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 7 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[i]t is possible that the jury convicted [Langley] of specific intent second degree murder”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Langley v. Prince · Langley v. Prince

2. “The filing by the defendant of the Motion To Recuse the District Attorney was a preliminary plea which suspended the running of the one-year limitation set forth in La.Code Crim.P. art. 578. State v. Vincent , 02-1452 (La.App. 3 Cir. 4/2/03) , 843 So.2d 1174 ; State v. McDonald , 02-909 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/5/03) , 838 So.2d 128 , writ denied , 03-807 (La. 10/17/03), 855 So.2d 758 . The trial court never ruled on that motion, and it was never withdrawn by the defendant. Therefore, the time limitation was suspended until the trial began on November 2, 2009, when both the state and the defense announced that they were ready for trial, and the trial commenced. The defendant did not object to or raise the issue of the pending Motion to Recuse District Attorney. The motion was pending until the day the trial began, at which time it was considered abandoned by the defendant. State v. Craig , 32,209 (La.App. 2 Cir. 8/18/99), 747 So.2d 604 . His failure to object constitutes a waiver of the objection. State v. Woodfox , 291 So.2d 388 (La.1974) ; State v. Jennings , 07-150 (La.App. 3 Cir. 5/30/07) , 958 So.2d 144 , writ denied , 07-1460 (La. 1/7/08), 973 So.2d 731 ; State v. Pratt , 32,302 (La.App. 3 Cir. 9/22/99), 748 So.2d 25 . The filing of the Motion To Recuse District Attorney suspended the running of the prescription. It remained suspended as it was neither withdrawn by the defendant nor ruled upon by the court before the trial commenced. Even if defense counsel's arguments at the ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Broussard

3. “prohibits the state from relitigating an issue of ultimate fact that has been determined by a valid and final judgment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Langley v. Prince