795 So. 2d 488 - State v. Rodrigue’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In determining the knowing and intelligent nature of the waiver of right to counsel, the trial judge should consider such factors as the age, education, experience, background, competency and conduct of the accused as well as the gravity of the offense. State v. Redrigue, 01-377 (La.App. 5 Cir. 8/28/01) , 795 So.2d 488, 493 ; State v. Pickett, 99-532 (La.App. 5 Cir. 10/26/99) , 746 So.2d 185, 188 . Whether an accused has made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel is a question which depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. State v. Strain, 585 So.2d 540 at 542 (La.1991); State v. Rodrigue, 795 So.2d at 493 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Daigle · 127 So. 3d 1075 - State v. Bergeron

2. “I UNDERSTAND THAT BY ENTERING A GUILTY PLEA I AM GIVING UP THE FOLLOWING RIGHTS: My right to a (jury) trial. My right to require the State to prove my guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. My right to cross-examine witnesses called to testify against me. My right not to be compelled to incriminate myself. My right to appeal. I UNDERSTAND THAT BY PLEADING GUILTY I AM AUTHORIZING THE COURT TO IMPOSE UP TO THE MAXIMUM SENTENCE PROVIDED BY LAW WITHOUT A TRIAL. I UNDERSTAND MY RIGHT TO THE ASSISTANCE OF A LAWYER AND WISH TO WAIVE THAT RIGHT AND ENTER A GUILTY PLEA WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE OF A LAWYER. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS PLEA CAN BE USED AGAINST ME AS A SECOND OR THIRD OFFENDER, AND THAT THIS PLEA CAN SERIOUSLY AFFECT ME UNDER THE HABITUAL OFFENDER LAW.”

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