870 So. 2d 995 - State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
70
cited by 70 later decisions
2
states following
December 2018
most recently cited
70 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · 523 So. 2d 1305 - State v. Mussall · 603 So. 2d 731 - State v. Hearold · 448 So. 2d 676 - State v. Captville · 425 So. 2d 1222 - State v. Trahan
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The trier of fact makes credibility determinations and may, within the bounds of rationality, accept or reject the testimony; thus, a reviewing court may impinge on the `fact finder's discretion only to the extent necessary to guarantee the fundamental due process of law.'”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“'[M]ere presence of a defendant in the area of the contraband or other evidence seized alone does not prove that he exercised dominion and control over the evidence and therefore had it in his constructive possession.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“The evidence presented by the State was sufficient to prove that the defendant was in fact in possession of the weapon and that this possession was enough to sustain a conviction on the charge of a felon in possession of a firearm, La. R.S. 14:95.1.... In this matter, the jury made a credibility determination and found [two witnesses'] accounts unconvincing. Consequently, it was inappropriate for the court of appeal to impinge on the fact finder's discretion to rely instead on the testimony of [a third witness] absent a showing that the defendant was not granted the fundamental due process of law.”
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.