Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 823 So. 2d 987 - State v. Harry

823 So. 2d 987 - State v. Harry’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
October 2014
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Negron v. United States · State v. Dorthey · Griffith v. United States · 709 So. 2d 672 - State v. Johnson

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

  1. “"Entrapment" is an affirmative defense that applies when a law enforcement official originates the idea of the crime and induces another person to engage in conduct constituting the crime, when the other person is not otherwise disposed to do so. The defendant claiming entrapment must prove the defense by a preponderance of the evidence. State v. Brand, 520 So.2d 114, 117 (La.1988); State v. Smith, 97-2221 (La.App. 4 Cir. 4/7/99) , 734 So.2d 826, 831 , writ denied, 99-1128 (La.10/1/99), 747 So.2d 1138 . To adequately support an entrapment defense, the defendant must present exculpatory circumstances that defeat culpability even though the state proved all essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Byrd, 568 So.2d 554 (La.1990); State v. Cheatwood, 458 So.2d 907 (La. 1984); 584 So.2d 724 , State v. St. Amant, 584 So.2d 724 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1991). The reviewing court must consider the defendant's predisposition to commit the crime as well as the conduct of the police officers involved. State v. Batiste, 363 So.2d 639 (La. 1978).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “has been jurisprudentially defined as transferring possession or control. State v. Harry, 01-2336 (La.App. 4 Cir.6/26/02), 823 So.2d 987, 993 , writs denied, 02-2029 (La.2/7/03), 836 So.2d 96 and 02-2299 (La.2/7/03), 836 So.2d 97 . A defendant may be guilty of distribution as a principal if he”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “aids and abets in the distribution or if he directly or indirectly counsels or procures another to distribute a controlled dangerous substance such as cocaine.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.