State v. Clifton’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently July 2022 · most notably State v. Fodor (1994), State v. Tubbs (1987)
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 Mesarosh v. United States · Eason v. Dandridge · Saia v. United States · United States v. Basurto · 446 F. Supp. 252 - United States v. Narciso
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.
“when the [tidal] court considers a motion for a new trial, its power is significantly expanded. ... Unlike a motion for a directed verdict, a motion for a new trial is discretionary and as such, in considering the motion for new trial, the trial court may weigh the evidence and consider the credibility of witnesses. Because a motion for a new trial based on the claim that the verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence involves weighing evidence and determining the credibility of witnesses, the trial court’s ruling on such a motion will not be reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“full credence to the right of the jury to determine credibility, weigh the evidence and draw justifiable conclusions therefrom....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“... the court must proceed with great care in examining the defendant’s motion [for new trial]. A has been stated many times, motions for a new trial are not looked upon with favor and are to be granted with great caution ... Trial by jury is one of the most treasured guarantees of the Bill of Rights. Ay interference with the jury’s province must be exercised punctiliously.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Fischer
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.