State v. Rabun’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 2011
7 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
Relies on State v. Savage · Duran v. State · State v. Rabun
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Rule 6(e) ... permits a five-day extension with the additional proviso that the "rule has no application to the mailing of notice of entry of judgment required by Rule 77(g).” Thus the civil rules explicitly make the civil analog (Rule 6(e), Ariz.R.Civ.P.) of Rule 1.3 inapplicable to a final judgment or appealable order. See A.R.S. § 12-2101.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Whenever a party has the right or is required to take some action within a prescribed period after service of a notice or other paper and such service is allowed and made by mail, 5 days shall be added to the prescribed period.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Zuniga“The notice of appeal shall be filed with the clerk of the trial court within 20 days after the entry of judgment and sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Zuniga
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.