830 So. 2d 984 - State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 46 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he statute specifically applies in two situations: 1) when an accused is charged with a crime involving sexually assaultive behavior, or 2) when an accused is charged with acts that constitute a sex offense involving a victim who was under the age of seventeen at the time of the offense.”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 28 So. 3d 357 - State v. Williams · 123 So. 3d 840 - State v. Hollins

2. “[t]he constitutionality of the statute was clearly not the central focus of any hearing and the trial record does not contain any arguments on the topic. The only mention of the constitutionality of the statute was on appeal.”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Nunez v. Tribe · State v. Colton

3. “exception to Article 404's other crimes prohibition, but, in doing so, noted that the evidence sought to be introduced would be admissible if Louisiana had a rule similar to Federal Rule of Evidence 413. The enactment of Article 412.2 was apparently the legislature's response to this Court's statements in McArthur and Kennedy as the language of Article 412.2 closely follows that of Federal Rule of Evidence 413. However, one distinction exists between the federal rule and the Louisiana rule. Federal Rule of Evidence 413 provides that the”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 874 So. 2d 318 - State v. Brown · 984 So. 2d 751 - State v. Buckenberger