633 So. 2d 822 - State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2018
18 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 · State v. Jacobs · State v. Mims · 420 So. 2d 1126 - State v. Graham · Cromwell v. Commerce & Energy Bank of Lafayette
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Specific intent may be inferred from the circumstances of a transaction and from the action of the accused. State v. Graham, 420 So.2d 1126, 1127 (La.1982). Further, specific intent is a legal conclusion to be resolved by the fact-finder. Id., at 1128 . In the present case, the victim, Bill Burgstiner, testified that while walking in the restaurant parking lot he observed defendant exit a vehicle and point a gun to the head of his companion Karen Woods. Although Ms. Woods did not hear defendant demand anything of value from her, it is undisputed that defendant was armed with a dangerous weapon within a few feet of Ms. Woods and his action in pointing the gun to Ms. Woods' head is clearly an act tending directly toward defendant's objective of robbing Ms. Woods. The defendant was tried by a twelve member jury of his peers. We think it quite reasonable for the jury to infer from the circumstances presented that defendant intended to commit an armed robbery of Ms. Woods and her companions. Viewing all the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, we find the evidence presented on the armed robbery charge is clearly sufficient to sustain defendant's conviction. (emphasis added)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Allen“taking of anything of value belonging to another from the person of another or that is in the immediate control of another, by use of force or intimidation, while armed with a dangerous weapon.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“grossly out of proportion to the severity of the crime”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Egana
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.