Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 119 Nev. 173 - State v. Haberstroh

State v. Haberstroh’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
1
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Robinson v. Ignacio (2004), State v. Huebler (2012)

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

220200320102020decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Chapman v. State of California · Batson v. Kentucky · Godfrey v. Georgia · Clemons v. Mississippi

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

  1. “We realize that the stipulation here preceded our decision [that application of the procedural bar is mandatory] and that [prisoner] relied upon the stipulation and did not present evidence or argument in regard to cause for raising his claims. Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude that we can treat the stipulation as establishing the facts to show cause to raise the relevant claims but allowing consideration of the claims’ merits only to determine the question of prejudice. This approach leaves the procedural default rules in effect and allows us to accept the stipulation and decide the appeal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “concern that this argument likely induced the jurors to rest their sentence to a significant degree on the invalid aggravator”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “relied upon the stipulation and did not present evidence or argument in regard to cause for raising his claims.”
    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.