Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 157 N.J. Super. 231 - State v. Trent

157 N.J. Super. 231 - State v. Trent’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
2
states following
November 2017
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably State v. Miller (1978), Commonwealth v. Connor (1984)

46 state decisions

18019781980199020002010decided

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 Illinois v. Allen · Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Southern Railway Co. v. North Carolina · Blasius v. United States · State v. MacOn

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

  1. “[T]he "unable to continue" language of the rule must be strictly construed and must ordinarily be limited to compelling circumstances which are exclusively personal to the juror in question, and hence which do not and which by their nature cannot raise the specter of either a jury taint or a substantive interference with the ultimate course of the deliberations beyond that necessarily implicit in the effect of new personalities on group dynamics.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Because they relate exclusively to the personal situation of the juror himself and not to his interaction with the other jurors or with the case itself, they are ordinarily not circumstances having the capacity to affect the substance or the course of the deliberations. Hence the continuation of the trial with a substituted alternate is in these circumstances no way violative of defendant's right to trial by a fair and impartial jury. In this respect the "unable to continue" standard is much narrower than the concept of good cause requiring the discharge of prospective jurors before trial commences.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “THE JUROR: I have a headache and feel like I want to spit up, just too emotional. THE COURT: All right. You feel if you took a break or something you'll feel better? THE JUROR: When I close my eyes I guess I'm just too easily get emotional, you know, when children is involved because I have children myself and it just hard for me to make a decision. I'm just all upset. I tried, you know, to go through with it but just because every time I see him sitting there I can picture my son sitting there. He's about 17 and it is just too much. I can't take no more. [ Id. at 235-36 , 384 A. 2d 888 (emphasis added).]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.