Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 12 WYO 49 - Keffer v. State

Keffer v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1903

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
6
states following
March 2010
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably Leick v. People (1958), Bouwkamp v. State (1992)

28 state decisions

50190319101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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.

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

  1. “"* * * `Where the answer of the juror is fairly susceptible of a construction consistent with his impartiality, the challenging party, if he claims that a different construction should be put upon it, should follow up his inquiries so as to elicit the real facts; and he cannot reasonably require that the juror shall be excluded on the ground that the examination, which he has chosen to leave imperfect, does not exclude all inference of bias.' * * *"”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““(a) After the jury has been impaneled and sworn, the trial shall proceed in the following order: * * * * * * “(Hi) The state must first produce its evidence; the defendant will then produce his evidence; “(iv) The state will then be confined to rebutting evidence unless the court, for good reasons, in furtherance of justice, shall permit it to offer evidence in chief.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Where a party desires the testimony of a witness not within the jurisdiction of the court, he must take the deposition of the witness, for he cannot have compulsory process to compel attendance, and he has no right to have a continuance, upon the ground that the witness has promised to attend, and will attend at a future term.””
    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.