85 So. 3d 810 - State v. Perkins’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"Sudden passion" and "heat of blood" are mitigating factors in the nature of a defense; and, when such factors are established by a preponderance of the evidence, a verdict for murder is inappropriate. State v. Baker , 41,555 (La.App. 2d Cir. 8/15/07), 962 So.2d 1198 , citing State v. Leger , 05-0011 (La. 7/10/06), 936 So.2d 108 , cert. denied , [549] U.S. [1221], 127 S.Ct. 1279 , 167 L.Ed.2d 100 (2007). The burden is on the defendant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted in "sudden passion" or "heat of blood." State v. Robinson , 32,794 (La.App. 2d Cir. 3/1/00), 754 So.2d 311 , writ denied , 00-0989 (La. 3/23/01), 787 So.2d 1008 . The defendant is not obligated to establish the factors affirmatively; the jury may infer them from the evidence presented. State v. Ellis , supra , [42,286 (La.App. 2d Cir. 7/11/07), 961 So.2d 636 ] citing State v. Jackson , 34,076 (La.App. 2d Cir. 12/6/00), 774 So.2d 1046 . Provocation shall not reduce a homicide to manslaughter if the jury finds that the defendant's blood had actually cooled, or that an average person's blood would have cooled, at the time the offense was committed. State v. Ellis, supra ."If a man unreasonably permits his impulse and passion to obscure his judgment, he will be fully responsible for the consequences of his act." State v. Leger, supra . Questions of provocation and time for cooling are questions for the jury to determine under the standard of the average or ordinary person with ordinary self-c”

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

2. “On the night of July 4, 2009, a large group of people in their late teens and early twenties gathered at a house in Lake Charles for a party. A fight broke out involving a young man named Taylor Johnson. After Johnson fell to the ground, various people began kicking him, and he assumed a fetal position. Some testimony indicated that the victim, Daniel Gueringer, and a young man named Devionte Edmonson intervened and stopped the fracas. Defendant, Johnson’s friend, arrived and stood near the fallen man; he produced a pistol, raised it over his head, and chambered a round. Although there |2was conflicting testimony regarding which young men took what actions, some partygoers attempted to subdue Defendant. They were unsuccessful. Defendant leveled the pistol and fired a shot. The victim fell to the ground with a head wound and later died.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 124 So. 3d 605 - State v. Perkins

3. “are mitigating factors in the nature of a defense; and, when such factors are established by a preponderance of the evidence, a verdict for murder is inappropriate. State v. Baker , 41,555 (La.App. 2d Cir. 8/15/07), 962 So.2d 1198 , citing State v. Leger , 05-0011 (La. 7/10/06), 936 So.2d 108 , cert. denied , [549] U.S. [1221], 127 S.Ct. 1279 , 167 L.Ed.2d 100 (2007). The burden is on the defendant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted in”

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