977 So. 2d 1061 - State v. Nelson’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. “After a jury trial on September 20, 2006, the Defendant was convicted of aggravated battery, in -violation of La. R.S. 14:34, which states in pertinent part, “[ajggravated battery is battery committed with a dangerous weapon.” Battery is defined in La.R.S. 14:33 as “the intentional use of force or violence upon the person of another; .... ” Thus, the State had to prove: one, that the Defendant committed the offense of battery; and two, said battery was committed with a dangerous weapon. The court finds that there was sufficient evidence presented at trial to find the Defendant guilty of the offense of aggravated battery. [4At trial, the following facts were adduced. Debra Williams, the victim, testified that she and the Defendant had lived together for several days, and on the day in question, she told the Defendant that she wanted him and his friends to leave her home. She then proceeded to put his belongings outside. Ms. Williams testified that in response to her comments and actions the Defendant “[r]an in the house and stabbed me in my arm.” She went on to testify that, while she did not know what type of knife the Defendant had, he did have a knife. The Defendant also testified at trial that he and Ms. Williams did have some words about him leaving; however, at the time he left, he testified that she was in good health. On cross-examination, the following exchange took place: Q [State]: All right, and you left, and uh ... all of a sudden she’s got blood all over the hous”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 98 So. 3d 960 - State v. Nelson

2. “The Defendant, Clarence Walker Nelson, was found guilty of aggravated battery, in violation of La.R.S. 14:34. On November 28, 2006, he was sentenced to serve ten years at hard labor. On December 11, 2006, the State filed a habitual offender bill in accordance with La. R.S. 15:629.1. Thereafter, on January 26, 2007, the Defendant was adjudicated as a third-time habitual offender and sentenced to life in prison without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. The Defendant filed his notice of appeal on February 7, 2007, which was granted by the trial court on February 12, 2007. The Defendant is now before this court seeking review of his conviction and adjudication, alleging the following assignments of errors: 1) The evidence was insufficient to support the aggravated battery conviction. 2) The evidence was insufficient to support the habitual offender adjudication.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 98 So. 3d 960 - State v. Nelson