State v. Benavidez’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently June 2016
22 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990)
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Olano · Barker v. Wingo · Estelle v. McGuire · Johnson v. United States
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that the length of delay caused by the recusals, a period that appears to amount to less than one month, should not be allocated to either party but should be excluded from the speedy trial period.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Gallegos“A statement is material if it has a natural tendency to influence or the capability to influence the decision of the decision-making body to which it is addressed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Silva
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.