State v. Tuzon’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably State v. Harding (1983), State v. Bracy (1985)
47 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Doyle v. Ohio · State v. Anderson · State v. Dowthard · State v. King
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The question of how to treat an open-end offense in cases where imposition of sentence is suspended and the defendant placed on probation was answered by this court in a recent case of State v. Risher, 117 Ariz. 587 , 574 P.2d 453 . There we said that an open-end offense shall be deemed a felony unless and until otherwise designated. In our instant case no designation had been made so the impeachment was proper. 118 Ariz. at 209 , 575 P.2d at 1235 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Soule““It is within the discretion of the trial court to decide whether a defendant may require a prosecuting attorney to testify in his behalf, (citation omitted) Calling a prosecutor as a witness for the defendant inevitably confuses the distinctions between advocate and witness, argument and testimony, and should be permitted only if required by a compelling need, (citations omitted)” State v. Tuzon, 118 Ariz. 205, 208 , 575 P.2d 1231, 1234 (1978).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jessen“[a] plea of self-defense . . . only seeks to justify a homicide. If the jury had found that it was unreasonable for the appellant to believe that the victim was shooting at him, then the homicide simply was not justified. The standard is a reasonable person’s belief, not the unreasonable, even if honest, belief of the accused. [Citation omitted.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hill v. State
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.