764 So. 2d 1027 - State v. Hilton’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
35
cited by 35 later decisions
3
states following
November 2018
most recently cited
35 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Arizona v. Fulminante · State v. Sepulvado · 416 So. 2d 528 - State v. Ratcliff · 432 So. 2d 910 - State v. Easley
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule, even though the declarant is available as a witness: . . . . (4) Statements for purposes of medical treatment and medical diagnosis in connection with treatment. Statements made for purposes of medical treatment and medical diagnosis in connection with treatment and describing medical history, or past or present symptoms, pain, or sensations, or the inception or general character of the cause or external source thereof insofar as reasonably pertinent to treatment or diagnosis in connection with treatment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“It is obvious that the judge found that defendant was the worst kind of offender and that the offenses were the most serious.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“This Court has stated that maximum sentences permitted under statute may be imposed only for the most serious offenses and the worst offenders, State v. Easley, 432 So.2d 910, 914 (La.App. 1 Cir.1983), or when the offender poses an unusual risk to the public safety due to his past conduct of repeated criminality. See State v. Chaney, 537 So.2d 313, 318 (La.App. 1 Cir.1988), writ denied, 541 So.2d 870 (La.1989). A trial court's reasons for imposing sentence, as required by La.Code Crim. P. art. 894.1, are an important aid to this court when reviewing a sentence alleged to be excessive. State v. McKnight, 98-1790 at p. 25, 739 So.2d [343]at 359 [(La.App. 1 Cir. 1999)].”
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.