781 So. 2d 88 - State v. Allen’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
December 2015
most recently cited
14 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Boykin v. Alabama · North Carolina v. Alford · 338 So. 2d 584 - State v. Crosby · Lynch v. Overholser · 703 So. 2d 63 - State v. Winfrey
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.
“This Court addressed the same problem in State v. Winfrey, 97-427 (La.App. 5th Cir.10/38/97) (sic), 703 So.2d 63 ; writ denied, 98-0264 (La.6/19/98), 719 So.2d 481 . In that case, the defendant filed a motion to reconsider his one-hundred year enhanced sentence, which, on appeal, defendant claimed was excessive. This Court found that it would be premature to rule on the excessiveness issue while a motion to reconsider sentence was pending, and remanded the case with these instructions: Rather than rule on the excessiveness issue while a motion for reconsideration is pending which may vacate the present sentence, we remand the case for a ruling on the motion and supplementation of the record with the results. If the motion to reconsider is granted and defendant is re-sentenced, he may appeal the new | ^sentence. If the motion is denied or if it has already been ruled on, defendant must move to re-lodge this appeal within sixty days of the date of the ruling on the motion to reconsider sentence or the date of this opinion, whichever is later. State v. Winfrey, supra at 81 ; See also LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 881.4 C; State v. Smith, 96-285 (La.App. 5 Cir. 10/1/96) , 683 So.2d 826 ; State v. Sanders, 618 So.2d 904 (La.App. 1 Cir.1993).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Considering that the record in the instant case reflects that the trial court has not held a hearing on the motion to reconsider sentence, and that a trial court has discretion to reduce the defendant’s sentence if it believes such reduction is appropriate, we will not address the issue of the excessiveness of the sentence until the trial court has ruled upon the motion to reconsider.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.