Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 130 ARIZ 268 - State v. Pope

State v. Pope’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
October 1981
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Piper v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc. · State v. Gause · State v. Savage · State v. Byers · 27 Ariz. App. 309 - State v. Mitchell

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

  1. ““a. Motion for Rehearing; Response; Reply. Any party aggrieved by a final decision of the trial court in these proceedings may, within 10 days after the ruling of the court, move the court for a rehearing setting forth in detail the grounds wherein it is believed the court erred. There shall be a response filed within 10 days and reply within 10 days.” Rule 32.9(a), Rules of Criminal Procedure, 17 A.R.S.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Prior decisions of the Arizona courts have clearly established that the timely filing of the motion for rehearing required by Rule 32.9(a) and a petition for review in accordance with the provisions of Rule 32.9(c), are jurisdictional prerequisites to review by this court of trial court dispositions in post-conviction relief proceedings. * * * ” State v. Pope, Ariz., ’ 635 P.2d 861, 862 (App.1981).”
    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.