877 So. 2d 1135 - State v. McClain’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
February 2017
most recently cited
12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · 603 So. 2d 731 - State v. Hearold · 725 So. 2d 1291 - State v. Juluke · 750 So. 2d 1036 - State v. Hotoph · State ex rel. Jackson v. State
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The trial judge did not technically follow instructions set forth in LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 812(2) when he questioned the juror as opposed to remanding the jury for further deliberation or declaring a mistrial. However, we find the error to be harmless. In a similar case, State v. James, supra, defendant claimed the trial court erred in interrogating a juror regarding her “no” vote during the written polling of the jury in violation of LSA-C.Cr.P. art. 812. In James , the trial court called the juror to the bench and questioned her about her verdict. The juror revealed that she had initially felt the defendant was not guilty but felt outvoted and eventually voted that he was guilty. The Third Circuit concluded that, although the trial court did not comply with LSArjC.Cr.P.18 art. 812 when it failed to remand the entire jury panel for further deliberations or declare a mistrial, the error was harmless. The court noted the juror readily admitted. she voted to convict during deliberations. The court further noted the record did not reveal she was pressured to change her vote during deliberations but simply changed her mind and voted with the majority. The court determined that by questioning the juror, the trial court determined that all six jurors voted to convict the defendant. Also, in State v. Amato, 96-606 (La.App. 1 Cir. 6/30/97) , 698 So.2d 972, 988-989 , writs denied, 97-2626 and 97-2644 (La.2/20/98), 709 So.2d 772 , the First Circuit found the trial court’s questioning of a j”
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.