628 So. 2d 1295 - State v. Dixon’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently May 2019
13 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 Jackson v. Virginia · 277 So. 2d 126 - State v. Prieur · 459 So. 2d 31 - State v. Richardson · 372 So. 2d 1024 - State v. Hatcher · 278 So. 2d 781 - State v. Moore
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The date of the offense is not an essential element of the crime of aggravated rape. In a continuing relationship of this type, exact dates often cannot be supplied.... It was not necessary for the State to specify the date of an offense in the indictment or the bill of particulars, and any one of the offenses committed within that time frame could be proven to obtain a conviction for the crime with which defendant was charged.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he prohibition against evidence of other crimes is largely based upon the excessively prejudicial effect upon the accused's constitutional presumption of innocence of the crime for which (alone) the accused is on trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In a prosecution for the commission of rape of a female under the age of consent, the evidence of prior sex offenses committed by the defendant with the same prosecutrix is generally admissible. Such evidence has been admitted for various reasons, such as corroboration of the offense charged, to show intimate relations between the parties, the lustful disposition of the defendant and the probability of his having committed the offense charged, or to rebut the defense of alibi. State v. Morgan, 296 So.2d 286, 288 (La. 1974). Also, State v. Ferrand, 210 La. 394 , 27 So.2d 174 (1946); State v. Esponge, 593 So.2d 677, 678 (La.App. 1st Cir.1991); [ State v. ] Acliese, 403 So.2d [665,] at 667. However, a Prieur notice is usually given prior to trial. In the case before us, the defendant is accused of aggravated rape of the same victim within a sixteen month period. The bill of particulars alleged that the defendant committed aggravated rape of the victim sometime during a sixteen month period. The evidence showed that the victim and the defendant had a sexual relationship over that sixteen month period. The prior jurisprudence defines this type of sexual relationship as a "continuing relationship." State v. Case, 357 So.2d 498, 499 (La.1978); State v. Kohl, 524 So.2d 781, 784 (La.App. 3d Cir.1988). We have found no other cases in which the defendant objected to the lack of a Prieur notice for the introduction of evidence of other sex crimes with the same prosecutrix. However, we fi”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Johnson
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.