Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 681 SO2D 320 - State v. Divers

State v. Divers’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably 851 So. 2d 921 - State v. Tate (2003), 898 So. 2d 1219 - State v. Higgins (2005)

1 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

210199620002010decided

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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · Wainwright v. Witt · Sullivan v. Louisiana · Sawyer v. Whitley · Morgan v. Illinois

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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “accept the law as given ... by the court.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. State v. Wilson · State v. Jacobs
  2. “LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 797 provides in pertinent part: The state or the defendant may challenge a juror for cause on the ground that: * * * (2) The juror is not impartial, whatever the cause of his partiality. An opinion or impression as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant shall not of itself be sufficient ground of challenge to a juror, if he declares, and the court is satisfied, that he can render an impartial verdict according to the law and the evidence; * * * (4) The juror will not accept the law as given to him by the court.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
    e.g. 779 So. 2d 771 - State v. Richardson · 867 So. 2d 849 - State v. Van Sales
  3. “prevent or substantially impair the performance of their duties in accordance with their instructions or their oaths,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
    e.g. 824 So. 2d 1089 - State v. Ball · 874 So. 2d 66 - State v. Robinson

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.