655 So. 2d 470 - State v. Lynch’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently May 2019
20 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 433 So. 2d 688 - State v. Smith · 441 So. 2d 732 - State v. Lynch · 439 So. 2d 1099 - State v. Korman · 459 So. 2d 31 - State v. Richardson · 418 So. 2d 515 - State v. Smith
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The discovery rules of the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure are intended to eliminate unwarranted prejudice which could arise from surprise testimony. Discovery procedures enable the defendant to properly assess the strength of the state's case against him in order to prepare his defense. If a defendant is lulled into a misapprehension of the strength of the state's case by the failure to fully disclose, such prejudice may constitute reversible error. State v. Johnson, 604 So.2d 685 , 691 (La.App. 1st Cir. 1992), writ denied, 610 So.2d 795 (La. 1993). The articles regulating discovery do not specifically require the state to provide information concerning a witness's ability to identify the perpetrator, and a defendant has no general constitutional right to unlimited discovery in a criminal case. See La.C.Cr.P. arts. 716 - 723 ; State v. Brossette, 93-1036 (La.App. 3d Cir. 3/2/94), 634 So.2d 1309 , 1317, writ denied, 94-0802 (La. 6/24/94), 640 So.2d 1344 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Parker“the discovery statutes do not require the State to inform the defense about identification procedures[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Parker“defendant suffered no substantial prejudice[,]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Parker
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.