Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 175 Mont. 189 - State v. Azure

State v. Azure’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
2
states following
March 2010
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 41 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably Hans v. State (1997), State v. Brodniak (1986)

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 41 state decisions

23019771980199020002010decided

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. Taylor · State v. Thomas · 235 F. Supp. 673 - Jones v. State of Montana

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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The District Court made no inquiry as to whether defendant understood that by purposely or knowingly causing the death of Randy Lewis he may have committed either deliberate homicide or mitigated deliberate homicide. Nor was defendant informed that if he went to trial on the charge of deliberate homicide, he would have the right to present evidence of mitigation, and if the jury accepted his version of the offense and convicted him of mitigated deliberate homicide, the maximum sentence he could receive would be a 40 year prison term. “When an accused pleads guilty to the crime of deliberate homicide charged under Montana’s statutory scheme which sets out distinct kinds of criminal homicide, it is of vital importance that the record discloses the defendant had a full understanding of the precise kind of homicide to which he plead. Absent such a showing, this Court will not assume the plea was made ‘with an understanding of the charge.’ “Because the District Court did not determine whether defendant understood the differing elements and effects of deliberate homicide and mitigated deliberate homicide, we hold that acceptance of his plea of guilty was improper. The District Court should have granted defendant’s motion for leave to withdraw the guilty plea.” 573 P.2d at 183 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “This court, after considering the defendant's Motion to Withdraw his Guilty Plea, denies his request. (See Rule 33(c) of the Idaho Criminal Rule) Thomas Eugene Creech's plea and my sentence will stand! No Manifest injustice has been shown. A sentence of death is a tragic and extraordinary penalty, but when it is legally and properly imposed, execution must follow, or surely we are not a nation ruled and governed by law. IT IS SO ORDERED.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The court may refuse to accept a plea of guilty and shall not accept the plea of guilty without first determining that the plea is voluntary with an understanding of the charge.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.