State v. Bacuzzi’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably 750 So. 2d 1036 - State v. Hotoph (1999), 759 So. 2d 961 - State v. Wickem (2000)
41 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 State v. Oliveaux · State v. Weiland · 398 So. 2d 1049 - State v. Jones · 441 So. 2d 732 - State v. Lynch · 416 So. 2d 528 - State v. Ratcliff
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whoever commits the crime of aggravated battery shall be fined not more than five thousand dollars, imprisoned with or without hard labor for not more than ten years, or both.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“This matter is now before the before the Court for purposes of sentencing. The Court takes notice that the Defendant, Mr. Qutoum, was convicted by a jury of his peers for the crime of aggravated arson on the 26th day of January in the year 2001. In imposing sentence, the Court has taken into consideration the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure Article 894.1 and further the following factors. The Court notes that the Defendant has been convicted of a felony. The Court further notes the nature of the crime for which he has been convicted, that is aggravated arson. The Court notes that the offender created a risk of death or great bodily harm to other persons and particularly the Court notes that there was a minor child located within the building wherein the fire took place who had a respiratory problem for which the Defendant was aware of. There were other persons living within that area. The Court is of the opinion that there is an undue risk that if any suspended sentence were imposed that it would depreciate the seriousness of the Defendant's conduct. The Court further notes that there is a mandatory minimum of two years at hard labor which cannot be suspended, neither is there probation or parole available. The Court is of the opinion that the Defendant is in need of correctional treatment in an institution under the supervision of the State of Louisiana; that any lessor [sic] sentence than which I will now impose would depreciate the seriousness of the Defendant”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In reviewing a sentence for excessiveness, this Court must consider the punishment and the crime in light of the harm to society and gauge whether the penalty is so disproportionate as to shock our sense of justice, recognizing at the same time the wide discretion afforded the trial judge in determining and imposing sentence. A sentence within statutory limits will not be set aside as excessive absent manifest abuse of discretion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.