Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 120 Ariz. 596 - State v. Varela

State v. Varela’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
states following
December 2010
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently December 2010 · most notably In Re Pima County Juvenile Appeal No. 74802-2 (1990), State v. Getz (1997)

1 federal appellate · 44 state decisions

24019781980199020002010decided

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 Union Oil Co. v. California · State v. Bateman · Bateman v. Arizona · State v. Carr · 27 Cal. App. 3d 54 - People v. Poulin

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

  1. ““The basic rule in reviewing a statute for vagueness is to determine whether the offense is defined in terms that people of average intelligence can understand * *." State v. Varela, 120 Ariz. 596, 599 , 587 P.2d 1173, 1176 (1978).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A person may not urge the unconstitutionality of a statute unless he is harmfully affected by the application to him of the particular feature of the statute alleged to be violative of the constitution.”
    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.