State v. Wagner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “First, as a condition of probation, the trial court ordered a $250.00 fee to the Louisiana Crime Lab, for which a payment plan was not established. In State v. Wagner , 07-127, pp. 7-8 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/5/08), 996 So.2d 1203 , 1208, this court held in pertinent part: When the fines and costs are imposed as a condition of probation, but the trial court is silent as to the mode of payment or the trial court attempts to establish a payment plan, this court has required a specific payment plan be established. See State v. Theriot , 04-897 (La.App. 3 Cir. 2/9/05) , 893 So.2d 1016 (fine, court costs, and cost of prosecution); State v. Fuslier , 07-572 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/31/07) , 970 So.2d 83 (fine and costs); State v. Console , 07-1422 (La.App. 3 Cir. 4/30/08) , 981 So.2d 875 (fine and court costs). We view this procedure as no different from payment plans for restitution . See State v. Dean , 99-475 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/3/99) , 748 So.2d 57 , writ denied , 99-3413 (La. 5/26/00), 762 So.2d 1101 (restitution only), State v. Reynolds , 99-1847 (La.App. 3 Cir. 6/7/00) , 772 So.2d 128 (restitution, fine, and costs), State v. Stevens , 06-818 (La.App. 3 Cir. 1/31/07) , 949 So.2d 597 (restitution, fine, court costs, and reimbursement to Indigent Defender Board), and State v. Fontenot , 01-540 (La.App. 3 Cir. 11/7/01) , 799 So.2d 1255 (restitution, court costs and payments to victim's fund, Indigent Defender Board, and District Attorney). We, therefore, remand this case to the trial court ”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Mace · 34 So. 3d 1169 - State v. DD