In re Trull’s Empirical Analysis
1931
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably State v. Johnson (1969), Cooper v. State (1966)
26 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
Relies on State v. Dewey · In re McMicken for a Writ of Habeas Corpus · State v. Patterson · State v. Fry · State v. Braden
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is generally held that the statutes supplement the Constitution and are to be regarded as rendering the constitutional guaranty effective and constitute a legislative definition of what is, under the circumstances named, a reasonable and proper delay in bringing an accused to trial.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Stanley · Schrom v. Cramer“'This constitutional provision, adopted from the old common law, is intended to prevent the oppression of the citizen by holding criminal prosecutions suspended over him for an indefinite time; and to prevent delays in the administration of justice, by imposing on the judicial tribunals an obligation to proceed with reasonable dispatch in the trial of criminal accusations.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Queen““This court has repeatedly held, under the statute, that only the terms of court during which the information is actually on file are considered in determining when the defendant is entitled to a discharge. (State v. Braden, 78 Kan. 576 , 96 Pac. 840 ; State v. Patterson, 126 Kan. 770 , 271 Pac. 390 ; State v. Fry, 131 Kan. 277 , 291 Pac. 782 .)” (1. c. 167.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Rowland
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.