810 So. 2d 1127 - State v. Payton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

51 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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"To obtain a multiple offender conviction, the State is required to establish both the prior felony conviction and that the defendant is the same person convicted of that felony." State v. Neville, 96-0137 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/21/97) , 695 So.2d 534, 538-39 , writ denied, 97-1637 (La.12/12/97), 704 So.2d 1180 (citations omitted). In attempting to do so, the State may present: (1) testimony from witnesses; (2) expert opinion regarding the fingerprints of the defendant when compared with those in the prior record; (3) photographs in the duly authenticated record; or (4) evidence of identical drivers license number, sex, race and date of birth. See, e.g., State v. Westbrook, [ 392 So.2d 1043 (La.1980)]; see also State v. Curtis, 338 So.2d 662, 664 (La.1976).”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 107 So. 3d 916 - State v. Galle · State v. Hood

2. “[i]n order to prove the defendant is a habitual offender, the State need only establish by competent evidence that there is a prior felony conviction and that the defendant is the same person who was convicted of the prior felony.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Howard · 984 So. 2d 877 - State v. Alo

3. “does not require the State to use a specific type of evidence to carry its burden at an habitual offender hearing and that prior convictions may be proved by any competent evidence.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Henry · State v. Robertson