Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 708 So. 2d 1212 - State v. McCorkle

708 So. 2d 1212 - State v. McCorkle’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

74
cited by 74 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

73 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably 885 So. 2d 618 - State v. Lawson (2004), 821 So. 2d 60 - State v. Esteen (2002)

73 state decisions

400199820002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Arizona v. Fulminante · Sullivan v. Louisiana · Michigan v. Mosley · Oregon v. Bradshaw

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

  1. “Possession of cocaine is punishable by imprisonment, with or without hard labor, for not more than five years, or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both. La.R.S. 40:967(C). Thus, Allen’s five-year sentence was the maximum possible, but his $2,000.00 fine was less than one-half of the maximum possible. Allen received a significant benefit from his plea agreement. In addition to the reduction of two charges, two charges were dismissed, significantly diminishing his sentencing exposure. [[Image here]] Finally, Allen maintains that he is not the worst type of offender and the offense was not the most serious of offenses. He asserts that no one was injured in the crime and that the effect on society, in general, should not be a factor in justifying a maximum sentence. Allen does not refer to any jurisprudence upon which he relies in making this argument. The record reflects that the trial court considered Allen’s Presentence Investigation Report which contained a plethora of information, including his personal, employment, social, and criminal history. The trial court then referred to several of the facts contained in the report at sentencing. Most notable is that Allen is a fourth felony offender. |sThis court affirmed a $1,500.00 fine and the maximum five-year sentence for possession of cocaine in a case in which the defendant had two previous drug convictions, was originally charged with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, and in which the State refrained from ”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[a] defendant shall receive credit toward service of his sentence for time spent in actual custody prior to the imposition of sentence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[t]he motion for a new trial is based on the supposition that injustice has been done to the defendant, and, unless such injustice is shown to have been the case the motion shall be denied, no matter upon what allegations it is grounded.”
    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.