Mottram v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
April 1972
most recently cited
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Mottram · Dwyer v. State · State v. Hudspeth · Shalit v. Shalit · Nadeau v. State
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Petitioner’s counsel of the second trial acknowledges that the State had of fered to him full resort to the recordings and spent some hours listening to much of them. He asserts, however, that the audibility was only 10%. No complaint was raised by the Petitioner or by his counsel concerning lack of time or of opportunity to hear the records. All pertinent cross examination of State witnesses was the respected right of the Petitioner during his second trial. Petitioner had been present and collaborated in the making of more than half of the sound recordings. Neither he nor his trial counsel requested leave of Court or cooperation of State counsel to correct any inaudibility in sound reproduction.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mottram v. State““ * * * I did ask Mr. Chapman, (State’s attorney at the second.trial) and I believe the Court also, that I wanted some time with you (Mottram) to listen to the records with me, and they told me that they would be very glad to co-operate. * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mottram v. State
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.