774 So. 2d 1040 - State v. Cooper’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Even though the victim in this case is alleged to be a cousin of the District Attorney, the defendant introduced no evidence at all at the hearing on his motion to recuse. 1 ^Therefore, there is nothing before us to suggest that the relationship, if any, between the District Attorney and the victim in this case influenced the fair and impartial administration of justice in this case. The defendant has not produced any evidence to suggest that Harry Connick, Sr., was personally involved in this case, that he discussed the case with the assistant who handled the case, that he refused to allow the assistant to offer a plea bargain or that the alleged relationship between the victim and the District Attorney in any way affected the resolution of the defendant’s case. In State ex rel T.F., 98-3033 (La.App. 4 Cir. 4/1/99) , 732 So.2d 125, 127 , this Court cited the standard set forth in State v. Bourque, 622 So.2d 198 (La.1993): The defendant did not present any evidence tending to show a personal interest on behalf of the entire district attorney’s office, which would threaten the fair and impartial administration of justice. ‘The mere presence of a victim’s relative in the district attorney’s office does not support a finding of recusal.’ [Citation omitted] The record shows that the defendant in the instant case is a career criminal with prior convictions for purse snatching in 1988, distribution of cocaine in 1990 and, most recently, for aggravated battery of a police officer an”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 161 So. 3d 64 - State v. Ellis