165 Ind. App. 37 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently December 1998 · most notably Sweeney v. State (1998), 172 Ind. App. 199 - Cooley v. State (1977)
29 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 Patterson v. State · United States v. Bentvena · Kiefer v. State · New v. State · Bryant 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'The essence of this contention is that these portions of appellant's Federal and State sentences must run concurrently. However, it is established law that there is no right to serve concurrent sentences for different crimes in the absence of a statute so providing, and that concurrent sentences may be ordered only when they are to be served in the same institution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shropshire v. State“When sentencing any person convicted of a crime the sentencing court shall order that the sentenced person be given credit toward service of his sentence for any days spent in confinement as a result of the criminal charge for which sentence is imposed or as a result of the conduct on which such charge is based.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Moliga
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.