777 So. 2d 584 - State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In a non-homicide situation, the defense of justification requires a dual inquiry, namely: an objective inquiry into whether the force used was reasonable under the circumstances; and, a subjective inquiry into whether the force was apparently necessary.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Woods · 947 So. 2d 127 - State v. Rideau

2. “Even though a sentence under the Habitual Offender Law is the minimum provided by that statute, the sentence may still be unconstitutionally excessive if it makes no measurable contribution to acceptable goals of punishment, or is nothing more than the purposeful imposition of pain and suffering and is grossly out of proportion to the severity of the crime. State v. Johnson, 97-1906, pp. 6-7 (La.3/4/98), 709 So.2d 672, 676-677 ; State v. Dorthey, 623 So.2d 1276, 1280-81 (La.1993). However, the entire Habitual Offender Law has been held constitutional, and, thus, the minimum sentences it imposes upon habitual offenders are also presumed to be constitutional. Johnson , 97-1906, at pp. 5-6, 709 So.2d at 675 ; see also State v. Young, 94-1636, p. 5 (La.App. 4 Cir. 10/26/95), 663 So.2d 525, 527 , writ denied, 95-3010 (La.3/22/96), 669 So.2d 1223 . There must be substantial evidence to rebut the presumption of constitutionality. State v. Francis, 96-2389, p. 7 (La.App. 4 Cir.4/15/98), 715 So.2d 457, 461 , writ denied, 98-2360 (La.2/5/99), 737 So.2d 741 . Recently, the Louisiana Supreme Court in State v. Lindsey, 99-3256 (La.10/17/00), 770 So.2d 339 , mandated that the guidelines set forth in State v. Johnson, 97-1906 (La.3/4/98), 709 So.2d 672 , govern the review of mandatory minimum sentencing under an excessive sentence claim.”

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

3. “If the third felony or either of the two prior felonies is a felony defined as a crime of violence under R.S. 14:2(13) or as a violation of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Law punishable by imprisonment for more than five years or any | sother crime punishable by imprisonment for more than twelve years, the person shall be imprisoned for the remainder of his natural life, without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.”

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