Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 110 Ariz. 180 - State v. Puffer

State v. Puffer’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2019

18 state decisions

8019731980199020002010decided

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 Sullivan v. State of Arizona · State v. Blankenship · State v. Makal · State v. Lockett

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

  1. ““The general criteria for determining whether remarks by the prosecution in a criminal case are so objectionable as to require a reversal of the case are whether the remarks call to the attention of the jury matters which they would not be justified in considering in order to arrive at their verdict and whether the jury, under the circumstances of the case, was probably influenced by those remarks. Sullivan v. State, 47 Ariz. 224, at 238 , 55 P.2d 312, at 317 (1936).” State v. Puffer, 110 Ariz. 180 , 516 P.2d 316, at 317 (1973).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.