State v. S.N.’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on United States v. Salerno · Pierce v. Underwood · State v. Johnson · State v. Elders · 197 L. Ed. 2d 500 - McLane Co. v. EEOC
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.
“whether the trial court abused its discretion by relying on an impermissible basis, by relying upon irrelevant or inappropriate factors, by failing to consider all relevant factors, or by making a clear error in judgment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The standard of proof for the rebuttal of the presumption of pretrial release shall be by clear and convincing evidence. The court may consider as prima facie evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption of release a recommendation by the Pretrial Services Program established pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:162-25 that the defendant's release is not recommended (i.e., a determination that "release not recommended or if released, maximum conditions"). Although such recommendation by the Pretrial Services Program may constitute sufficient evidence upon which the court may order pretrial detention , nothing herein shall preclude the court from considering other relevant information presented by the prosecutor or the defendant in determining whether no amount of monetary bail, non-monetary bail conditions of pretrial release or combination of monetary bail and conditions would reasonably assure the defendant's appearance in court when required, the protection of the safety of any other person or the community, and that the defendant will not obstruct the criminal justice process. [ R. 3:4A(b)(5) (emphases added).]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Mercedes“[A] standard of deference to a trial court's factfindings, even factfindings based solely on video or documentary evidence, best advances the interests of justice in a judicial * system that assigns different roles to trial courts and appellate courts.”
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.