State v. Manuel’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

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

1. “mandated that the trial court state both the considerations and the factual basis taken into account in the sentencing. See La.Code Crim.P. art. 5. The purpose of obligating the trial court to do so”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Spencer · 799 So. 2d 1255 - State v. Fontenot

2. “All right, Mr. Spencer, for the reasons that I told you before, particularly as a result of the pre-sentence investigation and sentencing hearing, and the statements that were received by the Court at that time, I'm gonna sentence you to serve fifteen years at hard labor with the Department of Safety and Corrections. I'm gonna suspend all but three years of that sentence, giving you credit for time served to apply toward that sentence. And upon your release I will place you on five years supervised probation with the Department of Safety and Corrections, under the usual conditions of probation of—under Article 895—(pause)—and—(inaudible) ... that meet the requirements of any special conditions of probation as reflected in the opinion of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. In imposing this sentence, of course, the Court does take into consideration the facts that were introduced at the sentencing hearing; the—under Article 894.1 the fact that there would be an undue risk during any period of suspension of sentence, or if the entire sentence were suspended that you would commit another crime; that the crime that you committed justifies the Court finding that you're in need of correctional treatment and a custodial environment that can be provided most effectively by commitment to an institution; that a lesser sentence will deprecate the seriousness of the crime; that the crime which you committed is deemed by the Louisiana Legislature to be a serious one by virtue of the penalt”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Spencer

3. “[C]ompliance with La.Code Crim.P. art. 894.1 is not an academic exercise. Among the benefits of the trial court's compliance is that the reviewing court becomes aware of the trial court's specific factual findings relied upon in the sentencing process. Such awareness provides the reviewing court with the trial court's credibility analysis as well as other factors which may not appear from the cold record. Mere conclusory comments are of no help and cause the reviewing court to evaluate the sentencing issue in a vacuum.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Spencer