676 So. 2d 1081 - State v. Hamilton’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently February 2013
12 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 5601 (Code Adam Act of 2003)
Relies on County of Riverside v. McLaughlin · Perry v. Louisiana · State v. Lacour · Cox Cable New Orleans, Inc. v. City of New Orleans
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under La.Ch.C. art. 303, the juvenile courts have exclusive original jurisdiction over delinquency proceedings except when a child is subject to the original jurisdiction of the criminal courts pursuant to art. 305 et seq. or when a child has been transferred by the juvenile court for criminal prosecution as an adult pursuant to art. 857 et seq. Louisiana Children’s 'Code art. 305 provides for original criminal jurisdiction over juveniles charged with the most serious offenses. As under the pre-Children’s Code jurisdictional statute, La.R.S. 13:1570, La.Ch.C. art. 305 states that initially jurisdiction over juvenile criminal offenses vests exclusively in the juvenile court. Only when a divesting event occurs, does the district court obtain jurisdiction over the proceedings. State v. Lacour, 398 So.2d 1129, 1132 (La.1981). For certain offenses punishable by death or life imprisonment, Subsection A of La.Ch.C. art. 305 provides that the juvenile court is automatically divested of jurisdiction when an indictment is obtained or when the court finds probable cause that the accused committed the offense. La.Ch.C. art. 305 A. Thus, an offender fifteen years of age or older must be tried as an adult for the offenses listed in section A(l). This automatic and irreversible divestiture of jurisdiction from the juvenile court to the district court is generally called “legislative waiver” because legislative fiat has automatically waived juvenile court jurisdiction in these cases. See Sam”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the juvenile court on its own motion or on motion of the district attorney to consider the transfer of a juvenile to criminal court for prosecution for certain enumerated offenses where the juvenile is not otherwise subject to original jurisdiction of the criminal court. These transfer provisions differ from the art. 305 scheme in that the criminal court has no original jurisdiction and obtains jurisdiction only after a transfer hearing at which time the state must show by clear and convincing proof that there is no substantial opportunity for the child's rehabilitation through the juvenile system. This method of transfer is authorized by La. Const. Art. V, § 19. (Emphasis in original).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The proper remedy for an untimely filing of a bill of information or indictment under La.Ch.C. art. 305(B)(3) should be release without bail rather than the quashing of charges against the defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ste. Marie
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.