Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 160 W. Va. 730 - State Ex Rel. Smith v. Scott

160 W. Va. 730 - State Ex Rel. Smith v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
1
states following
June 2010
most recently cited

39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently June 2010 · most notably 164 W. Va. 112 - Hinkle v. Black (1979), 170 W. Va. 200 - State Ex Rel. Cook v. Helms (1982)

39 state decisions

22019771980199020002010decided

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 Kent v. United States · Breed v. Jones · Musser v. Utah · Harling v. United States · Summers 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “1. The seriousness of the alleged offense to the community and whether the protection of the community requires waiver. 2. Whether the alleged offense was committed in an aggressive, violent, premeditated or willful manner. 3. Whether the alleged offense was against persons or against property, greater weight being given to offenses against persons especially if personal injury resulted. 4. The prosecutive merit of the complaint, i.e., whether there is evidence upon which a Grand Jury may be expected to return an indictment (to be determined by consultation with the United States Attorney). 5. The desirability of trial and disposition of the entire offense in one court when the juvenile's associates in the alleged offense are adults who will be charged with a crime in the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia. 6. The sophistication and maturity of the Juvenile as determined by consideration of his home, environmental situation, emotional attitude and pattern of living. 7. The record and previous history of the juvenile, including previous contacts with the Youth Aid Division, other law enforcement agencies, juvenile courts and other jurisdictions, prior periods of probation to this Court, or prior commitments to juvenile institutions. 8. The prospects for adequate protection of the public and the likelihood of reasonable rehabilitation of the juvenile (if he is found to have committed the alleged offense) by the use of procedures, services and facilities currently”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “have largely set the standards for other courts and ... have been the model for statutes governing transfer hearings in other jurisdictions, (citations omitted)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “should be the exception and not the rule.”
    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.