State v. Birano’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently October 2020
5 state decisions
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.
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“by (1) denying Birano's motion for a mistrial based upon the improper meeting, and (2) granting the prosecutor's motion in limine to prevent Birano's counsel from cross-examining Nakano about the meeting and his reasons for changing his mind about testifying against Birano.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Birano v. State.“would conclude that something happened in the improper ex parte communication meeting which caused Nakano to change his mind about testifying against Birano.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Birano v. State.“basic fairness would require that Birano be allowed to cross-examine Nakano regarding what happened at the improper meeting.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Birano v. State.
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.