State v. Perry’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently February 1997 · most notably State v. Jeffers (1983), State v. Barnes (1980)
24 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 United States v. Wade · Doyle v. Ohio · People v. Daniels · Etchieson v. Texas · State v. Dessureault
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Rule 13.3(a)(3) provides that offenses may be joined in an indictment if they are part of a common scheme or plan. The phrase ‘common scheme or plan’ as employed in Rule 13.3(a) bears the same meaning as ‘common scheme or plan’ used in the context of the exception to the rule against the use of evidence in one prosecution tending to prove the commission of a crime distinct and independent of the one for which the accused is on trial... We think these similarities (between the two offenses on trial) exist where one would normally expect to find differences. There was no error in joining the offenses.” 567 P.2d at 795 -96”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Peacock“[A]fter the court finds that the pretrial identification was unduly suggestive and that by clear and convincing evidence the in-court identification was not tainted, then, if requested, the court must give [an instruction in accordance with Dessureault ].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Osorio“the Dessureault instruction is only warranted if the trial court finds that the pretrial identification was unduly suggestive.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Osorio
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.