State Ex Rel. Quintana v. Schnedar’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
4 district · 74 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably New Mexico Industrial Energy Consumers v. New Mexico Public Regulation Commission (2007), State v. Santillanes (2001)
4 district · 74 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.
Relationships
Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · State Ex Rel. Klineline v. Blackhurst · Quintana v. New Mexico Department of Corrections · Miller v. New Mexico Department of Transportation · Incorporated County of Los Alamos v. Johnson
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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the provisions of a statute must be read together with other statutes in pari materia under the presumption that the legislature acted with full knowledge of relevant statutory and common law. Thus, two statutes covering the same subject matter should be harmonized and construed together when possible, in a way that facilitates their operation and the achievement of their goals.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“be harmonized and construed together when possible ....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A. A needy person who is being detained by a law enforcement officer, or who is under formal charge of having committed, or is being detained under a conviction of, a serious crime, is entitled to be represented by an attorney to the same extent as a person having his own counsel and to be provided with the necessary services and facilities of representation, including investigation and other preparation. The attorney, services and facilities and expenses and court costs shall be provided at public expense for needy persons. B. A needy person entitled to representation by an attorney under Subsection A is entitled to be: (1) counseled and defended at all stages of the matter beginning with the earliest time when a person providing his own counsel would be entitled to be represented by an attorney; (2) represented in any appeal or review proceedings; and (3) represented in any other postconviction proceeding that the attorney or the needy person considers appropriate unless the court in which the proceeding is brought determines that it is not a proceeding that a reasonable person with adequate means would be willing to bring at Ms own expense. C. A needy person’s right to a benefit under this section is unaffected by his having provided a similar benefit at his own expense, or by his having waived it, at an earlier stage.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brown
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.