Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 116 Idaho 77 - State v. Carper

State v. Carper’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
May 1992
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Sibron v. State of New York Peters · Murphy v. Hunt · State v. Toohill · St. Pierre v. United States · State v. Nice

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

  1. “The invited error doctrine is well settled in Idaho. A defendant may not request a particular ruling by the trial court and later argue on appeal that the ruling was erroneous. This doctrine applies to sentencing decisions as well as to rulings during trial. There are, of course, limits to this doctrine. It would not apply to a requested sentence that violates the court’s statutory authority. Neither would it apply to a request made without any apparent tactical purpose. Moreover, relief might be appropriate if defense counsel heedlessly disregarded his client’s legitimate interests, or otherwise provided ineffective assistance, in a sentencing proceeding.”
    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.