Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 N.M. 592 - State v. Tarango

State v. Tarango’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
7
states following
February 2010
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently February 2010 · most notably State v. Barber (2004), Zurla v. State (1990)

50 state decisions

2201987199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Barker v. Wingo · United States v. MacDonald · State v. Gunzelman · 46 Ill. App. 3d 195 - People v. Daily · State v. Mascarenas

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

  1. ““When a defendant is discharged by a sending state, the purpose of the [Interstate Agreement on. Detainers] loses significance and defendant can no longer rely on its provisions. [Citation omitted.] The IAD only applies to individuals while they aré serving a prison term. [Citations omitted.] Once the prisoner is released, his rights regarding a speedy trial are the same as those of any other individual.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “three methods by which a prisoner can satisfy his obligations for activating the IAD: (a) transmission of his written notice and request for final disposition to the appropriate custodial officials; (b) substantial compliance with the IAD’s requirements that certain documents be filed with the proper authorities in the receiving state; or (c) actual notice by the receiving state.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “[t]he state cannot be held responsible for any delay prior to the point where it was notified of defendant's whereabouts”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.