92 So. 3d 989 - State v. A.D.L.’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 337 So. 2d 475 - State v. McCarroll · 404 So. 2d 954 - State v. Williams · Carriere v. St. Landry Parish Police Jury · 842 So. 2d 321 - State v. Pierre · Succession of Smith v. Kavanaugh, Pierson & Talley
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he trial court did not err when it allowed trial counsel to be subpoenaed and questioned concerning whether Defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to a trial by jury. All of the prerequisites of article [507] were satisfied. The information sought was essential to the completion of the current appeal. The State's purpose for issuing the subpoenas was not to harass either the client or the attorney but to resolve a question ordered to be resolved by this court. The subpoenas listed the specific information sought and gave timely notice. Finally, there was no alternative means of obtaining the information. The only indication in the record that a jury trial was waived was the fact that a judge trial occurred without objection and the question was not raised on appeal-it was this court that noticed and raised the error patent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Middleton
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.