993 So. 2d 659 - State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In State v. Johnson, 99-2104, p. 9 (La.App. 4 Cir. 9/6/00), 769 So.2d 660, 665 , the Fourth Circuit relied on Calhoun and reversed the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea to forcible rape. Like Calhoun , the Fourth Circuit relied on several factors that it concluded undercut the voluntariness of the defendant’s plea. It cited the trial court’s failure to notify the defendant of the sex registration requirements and defense counsel’s lack of preparation for trial. The court noted defense counsel was appointed on the day of | ^arraignment and could not have properly investigated the case pri- or to the entry of defendant’s guilty plea on the same day. On appeal, the defendant maintained his counsel advised him any defense was futile; however, the Fourth Circuit remarked that the preliminary hearing transcript showed the victim’s statements to the police were inconsistent. Conversely, in State v. Blanchard, 00-1147 (La.4/20/01), 786 So.2d 701 , the Louisiana Supreme Court distinguished Calhoun and found no basis to allow the defendant to withdraw his guilty plea despite the fact the trial court had failed to advise him of the sex registration requirements during the plea colloquy. The Supreme Court relied on evidence presented at the evidentiary hearing on the defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea to conclude the defendant was aware of the sex offender registration laws. Specifically, defense counsel testified that he informed the ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. GT, JR.