93 So. 3d 666 - State v. Barnes’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 state decisions

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “By the time the jury selection process was completed, the defendant had exhausted all of his peremptory challenges. When an accused has exhausted all of his peremptory challenges before completion of the jury panel, he is entitled to complain on appeal of a ruling refusing to maintain a challenge for cause made by him. State v. Monroe, 366 So.2d 1345 (La.1978), appeal after remand, 397 So.2d 1258 (La.1981), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1229 , 103 S.Ct. 3571 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1411 , reh. denied, 463 U.S. 1249 , 104 S.Ct. 36 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1455 (1983). State v. Scriber, 605 So.2d 661, 664 (La.App. 2 Cir.1992). As it applies in this matter, La.Code Crim.P. art. 797(4) provides that “[t]he state or the defendant may challenge a juror for cause on the ground that ... [t]he juror will not accept the law as given to him by the court[.]” Additionally, the supreme court has held that: 17Prejudice is presumed when a district court erroneously denies a challenge for cause and the defendant ultimately exhausts his peremptory challenges. State v. Kang, 02-2812, p. 3 (La.10/21/03), 859 So.2d 649, 651 ; State v. Robertson, 92-2660, p. 3 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d 1278, 1280 . A district court’s erroneous ruling which deprives a defendant of a peremptory challenge substantially violates that defendant’s rights and constitutes reversible error. Kang , 02-2812, at p. 3, 859 So.2d at 652 ; State v. Cross, 93-1189, p. 6 (La.6/30/95), 658 So.2d 683, 686 ; State v. Bourque, 622 So.2d 198, 225 (La.1993), overruled”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 129 So. 3d 38 - State v. Harrington