State v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 418 So. 2d 570 - State Ex Rel. Bailey v. City of West Monroe · 290 So. 2d 865 - City of Baton Rouge v. Norman · 764 So. 2d 1164 - State v. Williams · 701 So. 2d 1001 - State v. Ignot · 344 So. 2d 997 - State v. Schamburge
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“LA. An indictment that charges an offense in accordance with the provisions of this Title shall not be invalid or insufficient because of any defect or imperfection in, or omission of, any matter of form only, or because of any miswriting, misspelling, or improper English, or because of the use of any sign, symbol, figure, or abbreviation, or because of any similar defect, imperfection, omission, or uncertainty exists therein. The court may at any time cause the indictment to be amended in any respect to any such formal defect, imperfection, omission or uncertainty. Before the trial begins the court may order an indictment amended with respect to a defect of substance. After the trial begins a mistrial shall be ordered on the ground of a defect of substance.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lewis
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.