Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 930 So. 2d 951 - State v. Connolly

930 So. 2d 951 - State v. Connolly’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
3
states following
April 2022
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently April 2022

13 state decisions

110200620102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 455

Relies on Hinman v. Rogers · 505 So. 2d 933 - State v. Mills · 326 So. 2d 820 - State v. Maduell · State v. Connolly · State v. Laborde

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

  1. “A trial judge must step down in any case in which he is “biased, prejudiced or personally interested in the cause to such an extent that he would be unable to conduct a fair and impartial trial.” La.C.Cr.P. art. 671(A)(1); Offl Rev. Cm’t (“Ground (1) is the most important ground for recusation... .Recognition of bias or prejudice as a ground for recusation is in line with the basic purpose of recusation procedure, i.e. to protect the defendant’s right to a fair and impartial trial.”) A trial judge must also recuse himself even in the absence of a showing of specific bias or prejudice when he “[h]as been employed or consulted as an attorney in the cause, or has been associated with an attorney during the latter’s employment in the cause.... ” La. C.CrJP. art. 671(A)(3). Ji * * However, this Court has not required a trial judge to recuse himself from a case on grounds that he had previously prosecuted the defendant in a prior, unrelated case, and therefore might harbor some bias or prejudice against the defendant for that reason alone, (citations omitted)... .Nor has this Court required the disqualification of a judge solely on the basis of his or her coincidental employment in the District Attorney’s Office at the time the defendant was charged in a case over which the judge had no supervision or control before assuming the bench. State v. Bradford, 99-0996 (La.5/14/99), 735 So.2d 619 (La.1999)... .We thus declined to treat assistant district attorneys within the same office a”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A. In a criminal ease a judge of any court, trial or appellate, shall be recused when he: (1) Is biased, prejudiced, or personally interested in the cause to such an extent that he would be unable to conduct a fair and impartial trial; (2) Is ... an attorney employed in the cause, or of the district attorney; (3) Has been employed or consulted as an attorney in the cause, or has been associated with an attorney during the latter’s employment in the cause; [[Image here]] (6) Would be unable, for any other reason, to conduct a fair and impartial trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[w]here in private practice [the judge] served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter ....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.