828 So. 2d 1130 - State v. Coleman’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
December 2017
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Sullivan v. Louisiana · 419 So. 2d 475 - State v. Lanclos · 523 So. 2d 1305 - State v. Mussall · 424 So. 2d 1009 - State v. Quebedeaux
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.
“The purpose of the rule of sequestration is “to prevent witnesses from being influenced by the testimony of earlier witnesses” and “to strengthen the role of cross-examination in developing the facts.” State v. Chester, 97-2790 (La.12/1/98), 724 So.2d 1276 . In examining sequestration violations, the reviewing court considers the facts of each case to determine whether or not prejudice resulted. Further, a violation of the sequestration order does not warrant a mistrial absent an indication that the infraction materially prejudiced the defendant. State v. Barber, 30,019 (La. App. 2 Cir. 1/21/98), 706 So.2d 563 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Evidence of a person's character or a trait of his character, such as a moral quality, is not admissible for the purpose of proving that he acted in conformity therewith on a particular occasion[.]”
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.