996 So. 2d 1208 - State v. Wagner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “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, cost of prosecution); State v. Fustier, 07-572 (La.App. 3 Cir. 10/31/07) , 970 So.2d 83 (fine and costs); and, 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 dealing with payment 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). Similarly, the payment to the crime lab fund to be paid during the probationary period was an insufficient payment plan, requiring remand to the trial court for establishment of a payment plan. The plan may either be determined by the trial court or by Probation and Parole, with approval by the trial court”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 25 So. 3d 1002 - State v. LaCombe