Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 893 So. 2d 945 - State v. Johnson

893 So. 2d 945 - State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
March 2017
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on North Carolina v. Alford · In re Naccari · 600 So. 2d 113 - State v. Linear · 412 So. 2d 523 - Louisiana State Bar Ass'n v. O'HALLORAN · 759 So. 2d 126 - State v. Villarreal

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.

  1. “Generally, a defendant waives the right to question the merits of the State's case or the underlying factual basis by entering a plea of guilt, or plea of nolo contendere. State v. Brooks, 38,963 (La.App. 2 Cir. 9/22/04), 882 So.2d 724 , [ writ denied, 04-2634 (La.2/10/05), 896 So.2d 30 .]”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “When remanding a case for imposition of a supervision fee as a condition of probation, this court has stated: The defendant's sentence does not necessarily have to be vacated if the trial court decides to set the minimum monthly supervision fee. See State v. Harris, 93-1098 (La.1/5/96); 665 So.2d 1164 . In Harris , the Louisiana Supreme Court remanded the case and gave the trial court the option of amending the court minutes to reflect the change in sentence without bringing the inmate to court. The court stated that the district judge retains the discretion to vacate the sentence originally imposed and to resentence the inmate in open court. Harris allowed ministerial corrections of the record in instances where the trial court failed to impose special restrictions required by law. However, the trial court has some discretion in setting the probation supervision fee, as it can impose a fee between twenty and one hundred dollars per month. Therefore, if the trial court opts to assess the minimum fee required by law, it can correct the sentence in accordance with the procedures set forth in Harris . However, if the trial court wishes to set a higher fee, the trial court should vacate defendant's sentence and resentence him in open court. Therefore, although we affirm the defendant's conviction, we must remand the case to the trial court with instructions to set a monthly probation supervision fee to be paid in accordance with article 895.1(C). State v. Iles, 96-256 (La.App. 3 ”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]he- trier of fact is to consider the value that the stolen items have to the victim. “Unless it is shown the owner lacks- knowledge of the value of a movable, his testimony as to value is generally admissible, with its weight being left to the jury.” ■ Further, the owner of stolen property may testify regarding the value of the stolen items without the necessity of being qualified as an expert, and such testimony “can constitute am-pie evidence of the property’s value.””
    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.