158 W. Va. 629 - State v. Dudick’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
88 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 88 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably 166 W. Va. 153 - State v. Petry (1980), 203 W. Va. 561 - State v. Salmons (1998)
88 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3500
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States · United States v. Ventresca · Harrington v. California
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 88 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The offense of possession of a controlled substance also includes constructive possession, but the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge of the controlled substance and that it was subject to defendant’s dominion and control.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“In recent years this Court has tended to look with increasing favor upon the liberal use of discretion in criminal discovery while recognizing that the philosophy of full disclosure applicable in civil cases as embodied in the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure is inappropriate in criminal cases. The primary objection to full discovery in criminal cases has been that discovery would: (1) lead to perjury and the suppression of evidence; (2) promote the intimidation of witnesses; (3) give an unfair advantage to criminal defendants since there is no reciprocal right for the prosecution; and (4) require the prosecution to disclose its privileged work product. In some instances these objections are well founded, particularly in situations involving organized crime where the defendant has resources available in the underworld for the purpose of frustrating the judicial system.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Historically discovery in criminal cases has been largely within the discretion of the trial judge, State v. Cowan, _ W. Va. _, 197 S.E.2d 641 (1973), except with regard to any matter known to the prosecution which is obviously exculpatory in nature or which may be relevant and favorable to the defendant. [Citations omitted] In recent years this Court has tended to look with increasing favor upon the liberal use of discretion in criminal discovery while recognizing that the philosophy of full disclosure applicable to civil cases as embodied in the West Virginia Rules of Civil Procedure is inappropriate in criminal cases. ...” [_W. Va. at_, 213 S.E.2d at 463 ]”
2 later decisions 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.