967 So. 2d 538 - State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
December 2009
most recently cited
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 338 So. 2d 107 - State v. Ford · 817 So. 2d 1164 - State v. Harris · State v. Clark · 807 So. 2d 1071 - State v. Johnson · 904 So. 2d 778 - State v. Sublet
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.
“La. Const. art. I, § 19 provides in pertinent part: “No person shall be subjected to imprisonment ... without the right of review based upon a complete record of all evidence upon which the judgment is based.” See also, La. C. Cr. P. art. 843, which requires that all trial proceedings be recorded. Louisiana jurisprudence has consistently held that where appellate counsel was not trial counsel and no transcript of the testimony of trial is available, a defendant’s right to “appellate review is rendered meaningless ... and the interests of justice require that a defendant be afforded a new, fully-recorded trial.” State v. Ford, 338 So.2d 107, 110 (La.1976). See also, State v. Harris, 01-1910 (La.App. 4 Cir. 4/24/02) , 817 So.2d 1164 ; State v. Johnson, 01-1909 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1/23/02) , 807 So.2d 1071 .”
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.