847 So. 2d 629 - State v. Woodard’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “After the state presents a prima facie case of conspiracy, the burden of proof shifts to the defendant to present evidence showing his withdrawal from the conspiracy prior to the time the statements were made by his co-conspirators. The conspiracy is presumed to continue unless or until the defendant shows his withdrawal from or the termination of the conspiracy. United States v. Walker , 796 F.2d 43 , 49 (4th Cir.1986). To prove withdrawal, a defendant must show affirmative actions made by him that are inconsistent with the object of the conspiracy. United States v. United States Gypsum Co. , 438 U.S. 422 , 98 S.Ct. 2864 , 57 L.Ed.2d 854 (1978). Such affirmative actions include making a clean break through confession to the authorities as well as notification to the co-conspirators of abandonment or withdrawal. United States v. Patel , 879 F.2d 292 , 294 (7th Cir.1989), cert. denied , 494 U.S. 1016 , 110 S.Ct. 1318 , 108 L.Ed.2d 494 (1990). The standard for determining the admissibility of statements made by co-conspirators is less than that required to convict a defendant of conspiracy to commit an offense. A trial court's determination as to the admissibility of such evidence, i.e., whether the state has made a prima facie showing of a conspiracy and whether a defendant has sufficiently proven withdrawal so as to make his co-conspirators' statements admissible or inadmissible under LSA-C.E. Art. 801D(3)(b), will not be overturned absent clear error. See United States v. Ta”

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

2. “by a declarant while participating in a conspiracy to commit a crime or civil wrong and in furtherance of the objective of the conspiracy, provided that a prima facie case of conspiracy is established.”

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

3. “the state presented a prima facie case of conspiracy.”

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