712 So. 2d 139 - State v. Ward’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

cited by 5 later decisions

states following

May 2001

most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · 523 So. 2d 1305 - State v. Mussall · 445 So. 2d 1198 - State v. Wright · 488 So. 2d 965 - State v. Rosiere · 637 So. 2d 1012 - State v. Davis

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

“When there is an indirect reference to the defendant’s failure to take the stand and testify, the court determines the remark’s intended effect on the jury. [Citing cases.] For such an indirect reference to mandate a mistrial, the State must have intended to draw the jury’s attention to the defendant’s failure to testify. State v. Clay, 612 So.2d 266 (La.App. 4th Cir.1992). If the prosecutor’s intention was to emphasize that the State’s case was unrebutted and that there were witnesses other than the defendant who could have testified on behalf of the defense but did not, the comment does not constitute an indirect reference to the defendant’s failure to testify. State v. Johnson, 541 So.2d 818 (La.1989). But if the defendant was the only witness who could. have rebutted the State’s case, a reference to the fact that the case was uncontroverted focuses the jury’s attention on the defendant’s failure to testify. Id. at 822 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. 740 So. 2d 714 - State v. Smith
“The reviewing court is to consider the record as a whole and not just the evidence most favorable to the prosecution; and, if rational triers of fact could disagree as to the interpretation of the evidence, the rational decision to convict should be upheld.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. State v. Burton
“the taking of anything of value belonging to another from the person of another or that is in the immediate control of another, by use of force or intimidation, while armed with a dangerous weapon.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. State v. Burton

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.