State v. Casby’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
June 2010
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Indiana · 351 So. 2d 496 - State Ex Rel. Lockhart v. Armistead · State v. Denson · 402 So. 2d 88 - State ex rel. Grayer v. Armistead · 593 So. 2d 1348 - Pourciau v. East Louisiana State Hosp.
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.
“... B. (1) In no instance shall such custody, care, and treatment exceed the time of the maximum sentence the defendant could receive if convicted of the crime with which he is charged. At any time after commitment and on the recommendation of the superintendent of the institution that the defendant will not attain the capacity to proceed with his trial in the foreseeable future, the court shall, within sixty days and after at least ten days notice to the district attorney, defendant’s counsel and the Bureau of Legal Services of the De partment of Health and Hospitals, conduct a contradictory hearing to determine whether the mentally defective defendant is, and will in the foreseeable future be, incapable of standing trial and whether he is a danger to himself or others. (2) Repealed by Acts 2008, No. 861, § 2, eff. July 9, 2008. (3) If, after the hearing, the court determines that the incompetent defendant is unlikely in the foreseeable future to be capable of standing trial, the court shall order the defendant released or remanded to the custody of the Department of Health and Hospitals which, within ten days exclusive of weekends and holidays, may institute civil commitment proceedings pursuant to Title 28 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, or release the defendant. The defendant shall remain in custody pending such civil commitment proceedings. If the defendant is committed to a treatment facility pursuant to Title 28 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950, the”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A.The Criminal District Court for the Parish of Orleans shall have exclusive jurisdiction of the trial and punishment of all crimes, misdemeanors, and offenses committed within the parish of Orleans if the jurisdiction is not vested by law in some other court. B. The judges of the Criminal District Court for the Parish of Orleans shall have power to act as committing magistrates in all felony charges and to hold preliminary examinations, with authority to bail, or discharge, or to hold for trial, in all cases before said court. They also may adopt all necessary rules with respect thereto. C. (1) Pursuant to the authority vested by Sections 16 and 32 of Article V of the Constitution, the Criminal District Court for the Parish of Orleans is hereby vested with additional jurisdiction of certain cases previously under the jurisdiction of the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans as provided for in Paragraph (2) of this Subsection. (2) The Criminal District Court for the Parish of Orleans shall have exclusive jurisdiction over civil commitment proceedings when the court determines a mentally defective defendant, who is under the jurisdiction of the court on pending criminal charges but is incapable of standing trial, is a danger to himself or others, and is unlikely in the foreseeable future to be capable of standing trial. 2”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“there is nothing in the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure, in Title 28 of the Revised Statutes, or in La. R.S. 15:211(A) which requires the state to file a formal petition for a civil commitment once the trial court has determined under La.C.Cr.P. art. 648(B)(3) that a defendant is unlikely in the foreseeable future to regain his capacity to proceed. The statutes have not been amended to impose such a requirement in the years since the trial court first found that the defendants were unrestorably incompetent and dangerous, as required to designate his continued commitment as ‘civil.’”
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.