State v. Nunley’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
January 2006
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Wilson v. Carnahan · Hall v. Missouri Bd. of Probation and Parole · State v. Dodd · Hardin v. State · In Re Marriage of Wright
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Where the appellate court reviews the decision of a trial court, each point shall: (A) identify the trial court ruling or action that the appellant challenges; (B) state concisely the legal reasons for the appellant’s claim of reversible error; and (C) explain in summary fashion why, in the context of the case, those legal reasons support the claim of reversible error. The point shall be in substantially the following form: “The trial court erred in [■identify the challenged ruling or ac tion], because [state the legal reasons for the claim of reversible error], in that [explain why the legal reasons, in the context of the case, support the claim of reversible error ].” [[Image here]] (4) Abstract statements of law, standing alone, do not comply with this rule....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Mohamed · State v. Hackler
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.