762 So. 2d 662 - State v. Carter’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
14 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Kerr v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California · 709 So. 2d 672 - State v. Johnson · 118 S. Ct. 335 - Gens v. Federal Deposit Insurance · Allen v. Oklahoma · 628 So. 2d 1116 - State v. Foret
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A homicide is justifiable if committed in self-defense by one who reasonably believes that he is in eminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm, and that the killing is necessary to save himself from that danger. The danger need not have been real as long as the defendant reasonably believed that he was in actual danger. There are several factors that you should consider in determining whether the defendant has a reasonable belief that the killing was necessary to save himself from that danger: 1) The possibility of avoiding the necessity of taking human life by retreat, provided however, that a person who is not engaged in any unlawful activity, and is in a place where he has the right to be, has no duty to retreat before using deadly force to save himself from the danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm. He may stand his ground and meet force with force. 2) The excitement and confusion of the occasion. 3) The possibility of preventing the danger to himself by using force less than killing. 4) The defendant's knowledge of his assailant's dangerous character. And - 5) Any other factor which related to the reasonable belief that the person charged is in eminent danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily harm, and that the killing was necessary to save himself from that danger. Thus, if you find that the defendant killed in self-defense, and that the defendant believed he was in danger of losing his life or receiving great bodily h”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Daniels“In State v. Carter , 1997-2902, p. 34 (La. App. 4 Cir. 5/10/00), 762 So.2d 662 , 683, this Court held: La. C.Cr.P. art. 803 mandates that the trial court instruct the jury as to the law applicable to each case. La. C.Cr.P. art. 807 provides that the State and the defendant shall have the right before argument to submit to the court special written charges for the jury. A requested special charge”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Daniels“A duplicate copy ... is admissible to the same extent as an original unless a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original.”
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.