State v. Henderson’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently May 1997 · most notably State v. Chapple (1983), 25 Cal. 3d 640 - People v. Blair (1979)
37 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 Neil v. Biggers · United States v. Jorn · Wade v. Hunter · United States v. Josef Perez · Gordon v. United States
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““a. In General. Whenever 2 or more offenses ... have been joined for trial, and severance of any or all offenses, ... is necessary to promote a fair determination of the guilt or innocence of any defendant of any offense, the court may on its own initiative, and shall on motion of a party, order such severance. “b. As of Right. The defendant shall be entitled as of right to sever offenses joined only by virtue of Rule 13.3(a)(1).””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lee · State v. Curiel““a. Offenses. Provided that each is stated in a separate count, 2 or more offenses may be joined in an indictment, information, or complaint, if they: (1) Are of the same or similar character; or (2) Are based on the same conduct or are otherwise connected together in their commission; or (3) Are alleged to have been a part of a common scheme or plan.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lee · State v. Tipton““The court has repeatedly held that this exception and other exceptions to the general rule are to be used with the utmost caution in that the court must perceive a visual connection and in case any doubt is entertained, it is to be resolved in favor of defendant. The exception to the general rule is not secondary to the rule and before evidence of other crimes can be competent or admissible in a criminal trial to prove the specific crime charged on the grounds of common scheme or plan, the two or more crimes must be so clearly related that the proof of one tends to establish the other and should never be admitted when it tends to show that the accused has committed other crimes wholly independent of that for which he is on trial.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Roper
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.