Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 156 W. Va. 492 - State v. Harr

156 W. Va. 492 - State v. Harr’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
3
states following
October 1996
most recently cited

32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently October 1996 · most notably 161 W. Va. 530 - State v. Pratt (1978), 193 W. Va. 388 - State v. Sugg (1995)

32 state decisions

160197319801990decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Gregory v. United States · 156 W. Va. 385 - State v. Smith · 156 W. Va. 409 - State v. McArdle · 150 W. Va. 571 - State v. Fortner

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

  1. ““If the defendant in a criminal trial objects to the admissibility of evidence on the ground that it was obtained by an unlawful search, the admissibility of such evidence should be determined by the court, out of the presence of the jury, after hearing evidence pertaining to the search war rant and the manner in which the evidence was obtained.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Furthermore, it is now well established that, in the event a defendant in a criminal case objects to the admissibility of evidence on the ground of unlawful search, the question of admissibility should be detemined in the same manner required for determining the voluntariness of a confession. 194 S.E.2d at 655 .”
    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.