956 So. 2d 562 - State v. King’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) Has a personal interest in the cause or grand jury proceeding which is in conflict with fair and impartial administration of justice; (2) Is related to the party accused or to the party injured, or to the spouse of the accused or party injured, or to a party who is a focus of a grand jury investigation, to such an extent that it may appreciably influence him in the performance of the duties of his office; or (3) Has been employed or consulted in the case as attorney for the defendant before his election or appointment as district attorney.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Roussel · 103 So. 3d 627 - State v. Gatewood

2. “La. C.Cr.P. art. 680(1) does not envision a subjective determination as to whether the district attorney would, in fact, be unfair. The article employs an objective decision as to whether a reasonable person would believe the facts at issue regarding the district attorney's personal interest in the cause would impair his ability to act fairly and impartially in conducting defendant's prosecution.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 49 So. 3d 488 - State v. Marinello · State v. Roussel

3. “A personal interest in the cause could be any factor which results in the district attorney singling out a particular case for any reason unrelated to the duties and responsibilities of a prosecutor. A personal interest in the cause results if the district attorney or a prosecutor is the victim of the crime charged or if títere is a direct connection between the crime charged and the district attorney. See, e.g., State v. Tate, 185 La. 1006 , 171 So. 108 (1936); State v. Cox, 246 La. 748 , 167 So.2d 352 (1964); State v. Snyder, 256 La. 601 , 237 So.2d 392 (1970), where there was a direct connection between the charges and the district attorneys. A personal interest in the cause also results when an incident or occurrence adversely affects the district attorney's ability to exercise detached professional judgment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 212 So. 3d 619 - State v. Stalbert