State v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

57 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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(2) The juror is not impartial, whatever the cause of his partiality. An opinion or impression as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant shall not of itself be sufficient ground of challenge to a juror, if he declares, and the court is satisfied, that he can render an impartial verdict according to the law and the evidence;”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 115 So. 3d 578 - State v. Cleveland · 13 So. 3d 577 - State v. Raymond

2. “A defendant may not assign as error a ruling refusing to sustain a challenge for cause made by him, unless an objection thereto is made at the time of the ruling. The nature of the objection and grounds therefor shall be stated at the time of objection.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 110 So. 3d 1271 - State v. Law · State v. Mullen

3. “In Landry , this Court reversed a conviction and death sentence because the appellate record was so deficient that the Court could not properly review the case for error. Landry , 1997-0499, pp. 1-4, 751 So.2d at 214-16 . Even though this Court has found reversible error when material portions of the trial record were unavailable or incomplete, a “slight inaccuracy in a record or an inconsequential omission from it which is immaterial to a proper determination of the appeal” does not require reversal of a conviction. [State v.] Draughn, 2005-1825 p. 63 [ (La.1/17/07) ], 950 So.2d [583] at 625; State v. Castleberry, 1998-1388 p. 29 (La.4/13/99), 758 So.2d 749, 773 , cert. denied, 528 U.S. 893 , 120 S.Ct. 220 , 145 L.Ed.2d 185 (1999), quoting State v. Allen, 1995-1754 (La.9/5/96), 682 So.2d 713 (internal citation omitted). An incomplete record may be adequate for appellate review. Castleberry , 1998-1388 p. 29, 758 So.2d at 773 ; State v. Hawkins, 1996-0766 p. 8 (La.1/14/97), 688 So.2d 473, 480 . A defendant will not be entitled to relief on the basis of an incomplete record absent a showing that he was prejudiced by the missing portions of the record. Id. Defense counsel contends that the fact that the defendant represented himself at trial, coupled with the issues raised regarding the defendant’s competency, necessitate a complete and accurate record since the defendant lacks the ability to provide important information to his appellate counsel. However, the defense offers no”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 110 So. 3d 1271 - State v. Law